By David Slifka
One of the most valuable skills any manager at any level can have is the ability to recognize and handle conflict effectively. It is also important to recognize that conflict is not necessarily a bad thing in EMS management teams, but how teams deal with conflict can either make or break the goal of a productive and harmonious management team.
Over the course of my EMS career I have received many inquiries expressing frustration and desire for help in building and maintaining a harmonious and high-energy work environment. The frustrations are often about conflict between executive/senior leaders and mid-level managers.
Conflict occurs when two or more individuals who must work together fail to share the same views, and have different interests or goals. Remember, conflict can be an advantage and even in conflict, people are seldom opposed to each other. The frustration for many executives, chiefs and senior managers is how to collaboratively work through conflict for the good of the organization and the community.
Having had the opportunity to establish and manage numerous ambulance services throughout my career, I cannot emphasize enough the importance of incorporating a highly synchronized management team who share the same philosophy for the organization. A component toward achieving a high level of collaboration means each member of the management team develop a repertoire of diverse styles and tactics, which will most certainly entail the stretching of his or her comfort zone [1].
3 styles of conflict
It is important to understand the three styles of conflict and how they can be used to build a more robust and collaborative relationship between managers. Here’s an introduction to each style of conflict.
1. Avoidance
As a manager, I handle conflicts by either avoiding the situation and/or simply agreeing with the rest of my colleagues.
Avoidance can either be used as a sign of protecting oneself against discord or a lack of clarity regarding the subject being discussed. The avoider may either take the approach of sidestepping an issue by changing the topic or simply withdrawing from dealing with the issue.
This does not mean that the avoider will be ineffective [1]. For example, to avoid any negative feelings from colleagues a member of the management team goes along with the group.
2. Aggressiveness
Because you don’t know what you are doing I am going to have to do this myself or find someone that can!
Aggressiveness is often seen as verbal attacks. Have you experienced management meetings where a colleague is so passionate about a topic, becomes verbally aggressive?
Actions like this attack a colleague’s character, background or abilities. Many people engaging in verbal aggressiveness most often do not perceive their communication as being aggressive. It is imperative to understand the commonality in the relationship between avoidance and aggressiveness. Avoidance presents itself as a form of non-verbal communication whereas aggressiveness is of a verbal nature.
3. Collaboration
Rick is a good manager. He can sit down and listen to our problems without being defensive or jumping to conclusions.
Collaboration demands the most constructive engagement of any of the conflict styles. It demonstrates a high level of concern for the not only one’s own goals, but also that of the organization. Most importantly, collaboration is an “invitational rhetoric” that invites other people’s perspective allowing you to reach an amicable resolution for all involved [1].
The experience of my organization’s management team is to utilize this style, as it allows for decisions to be made on a consensus basis, which allows for members to “buy in” on the decisions made. Therefore, it is important to remember that collaboration does not conclude until all members are satisfied and can jointly support a decision.
Collaboration is described in the form of statements such as “When I get into a disagreement with a member of the management team, I try to work creatively to find other options.”
Collaboration is not a form of compromise because in compromise each member looks for an easy “middle” position that only results in partial satisfaction. Simply put, collaboration is not a way of saying, “it’s my fault,” or “we will do it my way,” rather collaboration is a search for a new way.
Managers must exercise diplomacy, collaboration and authority when needed, and try to lead towards solutions that leave all involved parties feeling at least OK about the situation. I invite your response as to how conflict is manifested in your organization and present any questions you may have regarding conflict.
About the author
David S. Slifka, BAS, EMT-P, EMSIC is the executive director for Reading Emergency Unit in Hillsdale County, Michigan. He has spent the past 40 years as a field paramedic, mid-level manager, and executive. He has established three EMS services and provides consulting services for both large and small EMS organizations. He is also an educator and is a member of the Society of Michigan EMS Instructor Coordinators and a former member of the Michigan Association of Ambulance Services (MAAS). Connect with him on Facebook or email him at davids@readingemergency.com.
References
1. Wilmot, W., & Hocker, J. (2011). Interpersonal Conflict (Eighth ed.). New York, New York: McGraw-Hill.