There is a well-known expression which says that ordinary employees have only personal problems, and only managers can transfer the company’s problems and tasks into the category of personal ones and successfully solve them as their own.
So all the problems within the team (quarrels, bullying, resentment, and so on) in most cases will be connected either with personal problems of subordinates or with the peculiarities of their character and behaviour.
Here are 9 of the most popular causes of conflicts between employees.
Struggle for status
There is a whole gulf between the desire to simply work and to make a career. Of course, relations in a team can be severely damaged if someone does not consider the opinions of others simply because they need to be noticed by a higher management.
Careerists, in their struggle for the attention of their head, may do various deeds that will lead to quarrels, problems and eventually personal conflicts:
- They may deliberately inform the manager of problems in the work of other employees.
- Show excessive initiative and keep colleagues from speaking up.
- They may pass off successful ideas of other employees as their own, such as those overheard or discussed in private conversations.
- And much more.
Of course, such behaviour is rarely welcomed by other team members and is definitely unacceptable for team building.
Some particularly zealous careerists are ready to go not only over the heads of their colleagues, but also over the heads of their immediate managers. After all, as we know, all means are good in war. Therefore, such employees can be expected to act similarly towards their supervisor.
Different reward/stimulation
Envy is one of the human sins. If you do something like others (according to your own feelings), but in return you receive disproportionate encouragement or, on the contrary, punishment… What kind of motivation can we talk about?
There is an important point for the manager here — you should not confuse situations of general ‘equalization’ and ‘caught thief’. For example, if the whole department has done a poor job, you should not punish anyone in particular for this. It will definitely be condemned by all members of the work team. The fact will certainly not go unnoticed. Rest assured, employees are very likely to share data about their salary.
But if someone has committed a personal misconduct, there must be a relevant item in the job description or in the documents regulating the rules for calculating wages, bonuses, or other incentive payments for adequate punishment (deprivation of bonus, reprimands and so on). If an employee does not receive the expected amount, they will certainly ask questions about why it happened.
Financial penalty is the most lucid, but it is also the most sensitive. The manager should always be ready to give a reasoned answer: who received such a sum of money and why. Accrual of bonuses and deprivation of bonus (especially deprivation) should be based on a fair position, and not on mere arbitrariness.
The same applies to other types of rewards or punishments. All reprimands, penalties, letters of commendation, awards must be fair and justified (i.e., supported by concrete facts).
Deception
This point is closely intertwined with the fairness of reward or punishment. But there is a nuance — deception can occur not only in the direction of boss-subordinate or company-employee, but also in the horizontal plane: employee-employee.
Such problems most often have a delayed start. The boss finds out about the problem only when the conflict turns into an acute phase. It is almost impossible to track the deception of one employee by another. It is even more difficult to clear who is right in this conflict.
Such situations can only be corrected by daily work to improve the atmosphere of trust between all employees of the team entrusted to you.
Heads should be especially responsible for promises made. All unfulfilled promises easily go to the status of deception. And for ordinary employees, the manager is the official face of the company.
Rumours and gossip
Rumours are usually caused by unfounded speculation and incomplete information, as well as deception. We have already discussed deception above, let us focus on insufficient information.
Before exchanging any information, it would not hurt to find out its reliability. And if any theoretical statement in scientific activity is easily confirmed by experiments, in personal communication it is necessary to operate with confirmed facts.
A rumour-monger may have a variety of purposes, ranging from slander for the sake of career advancement and promotion to an implicit way of resolving a personal conflict. It can be very difficult to find the original source of the rumour.
A manager needs to periodically monitor the exchange of personal information between subordinates. The main task is to identify particularly dangerous and damaging information that could lead to conflicts. The supervisor should be impartial and use only facts, not speculation, to stop the spread of false information and rumours.
Personal distaste
It’s simple — employees may not see eye to eye. But personal conflicts and conflicts of interest can interfere with the work process.
Moreover, such personal conflicts can turn into outright bullying. When several employees become ‘friends against’ another. This can happen because of some significant event (e.g., a misconduct) or censure of some life views, etc.
Such conflicts cannot be resolved by themselves. It is very likely that the negativity will accumulate and grow. The manager’s task is to find such situations in time and turn them into a compromise. For example, to divide such employees into different shifts, to set such tasks, when performing which they will not overlap and interact. The last measure is to dismiss one of the parties.
Divergence of opinion
The situation is in many respects similar to the previous one, as it is easily transferred to the status of personal enmity. But unlike the first one, a difference of opinion in the early stages can be resolved by constructive decisions on the part of the manager.
It is only necessary to understand the issue and find ironclad arguments confirming the rightness of one of the parties.
If there are no such arguments, you should smooth the situation and minimize communication on the issue or find a compromise that suits both sides of the conflict.
Divergence of purpose
The end does not always justify the means. People may go to work for different reasons: for status, for money, for career prospects, for the emotional benefits of success, and so on. And some people are interested in everything at once.
Ultimately, the divergence in goals turns into personal animosity and can end badly.
The manager’s actions are standard: identify the problem in a timely manner and find the most successful solution so that the consequences for the team and the work process are minimally negative.
Formalism
There are always two opposites: strict adherence to the rules and regulations prescribed in regulatory documents (e.g., labour contract), or absolute rejection of rules and regulations and working in accordance with personal beliefs (according to conscience or tradition).
Naturally, the party whose actions fully comply with the documented principles will be the right one from the point of view of the law.
Some managers tend to document all working relationships down to the smallest detail. This leads to formalism, and it can also lead to micromanagement. This is bad and inevitably leads to the accumulation of negativity on the part of subordinates towards the management.
Of course, the management will be bad, because they make sure that all the norms prescribed in the documents are fulfilled. All these are potential causes of conflicts.
That’s exactly what some employees do. Aren’t these duties in the contract? A personal request? Helping a colleague? No, I don’t have to….
The solution is simple — sometimes make concessions and be more human. This way you will further raise your credibility and set an example for the team.
Inappropriate policies and methods of the supervisor
In reality, you need a balance between formalism and human relations. But not always and not in all matters. And here is the main pitfall. If you break the established rules even once, it will definitely be noticed by the employees and perceived as an attempt to deceive (which can easily be reduced to conflicts over material gain).
Some people are more absentee, but they get nothing for it. Someone does not meet the norm, but gets paid like everyone else, someone goes on holiday at a good time, and someone only at the end of autumn… The list can be endless. Eventually, we get banal envy.
But if the managers will work like a robot, impartially, without making concessions, the degree of trust in them will be low, and the atmosphere in the team — rather negative. We have talked about this above.
Just for these tasks can be suitable such software solution as Projecto. This is special software for project management.
Instead of conclusions
Conflicts in any team are normal. It is impossible to achieve a state in which there is no friction between employees. The absence of external problems, threats, and difficulties can cause stagnation and a decrease in motivation and interest in the labour process.
But the manager’s task is to stop conflicts that threaten to become acute and interfere with the work process, and to make sure that all subordinates work in equal conditions. Off-work activities will also help to form a more friendly and cohesive team.
