????我曾在一家跨國化工公司，帶領(lǐng)100名高管參加遠(yuǎn)離工作的團(tuán)隊(duì)活動(dòng)。這些工程師的謙遜、友好和禮貌一開始就讓我非常吃驚。后來我決定冒一次險(xiǎn)，讓他們知道雖然他們都很友善，但我不知道在他們禮貌的外表下，是否掩蓋了隨時(shí)可能爆發(fā)的矛盾。人群中傳來了一陣笑聲。這算是尷尬的認(rèn)同嗎？

????當(dāng)我要求他們對(duì)公司內(nèi)的人際關(guān)系進(jìn)行評(píng)價(jià)時(shí)，88%的員工表示，他們來自一個(gè)“問題家庭”，人與人之間充滿了未公開的矛盾。

????對(duì)此我并不吃驚。在我們合作過的公司，我們最常見到的最具有爭議的一種行為就是回避矛盾。人們不會(huì)去解決意見分歧，然后協(xié)同一致工作，而是會(huì)抑制內(nèi)心的想法，直到老板離開會(huì)議現(xiàn)場(chǎng)，或者他們與志趣相投的同事在一起的時(shí)候，才會(huì)聊這些問題。團(tuán)隊(duì)分裂成許多兩極分化的小團(tuán)體，每個(gè)團(tuán)體都只關(guān)注自己的目標(biāo)。

????這似乎是一種不健康的傳染行為，但許多管理類文章卻容忍了這種做法。

????事實(shí)上，當(dāng)下有關(guān)職場(chǎng)矛盾管理的大多數(shù)文章基礎(chǔ)都是40年前的一種模型。1974年，肯尼斯?托馬斯與拉爾夫?基爾曼開發(fā)了這個(gè)模型，其中將回避作為解決矛盾的五種主要策略之一。但托馬斯與基爾曼曾明確表示，回避矛盾會(huì)妨礙團(tuán)隊(duì)在重要決策中相互協(xié)作，結(jié)果將導(dǎo)致決策失敗。所以，這并不是有效的策略。

????沒有人喜歡跟別人對(duì)立。大多數(shù)人甚至光是想到?jīng)_突就會(huì)開始緊張。但問題不會(huì)自己消失。它們只會(huì)日益惡化。

????那么，該怎么辦呢？

????讓所有人坐上同一艘船

????第一步是保證每個(gè)業(yè)務(wù)單位的目標(biāo)與組織目標(biāo)保持一致。公司規(guī)模越大、產(chǎn)品越多樣化，保持這種一致的難度也就更高——相互矛盾的目標(biāo)更有可能在員工之間造成摩擦。保證每個(gè)人的獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)與公司目標(biāo)掛鉤。告訴員工，他們需要將公司目標(biāo)放在首位，除非他們的績效僅僅取決于自己所在部門的成功。

????太陽石油公司（Sunoco）前任CEO林恩?埃爾森漢斯表示，將員工的目標(biāo)與獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)和公司目標(biāo)掛鉤將創(chuàng)造一個(gè)公平競(jìng)爭的環(huán)境，讓所有人都參與到對(duì)話當(dāng)中。

????埃爾森漢斯說：“最開始，人們或許不會(huì)彼此喜歡，彼此信任，甚至認(rèn)為別人一無是處。但如果公司培養(yǎng)所有人對(duì)公司的責(zé)任心，形成一種規(guī)范，例如所有人一起討論問題，找出解決問題的可選解決方案，就會(huì)逐漸建立起一種相互信任和尊重的氛圍。人們開始從不同的角度看待問題。‘我們要幫助彼此取得成功，進(jìn)而讓公司獲得成功。’”她補(bǔ)充道，這樣做會(huì)帶來一種自然而然的結(jié)果，即人們會(huì)開始認(rèn)為絕不能讓彼此失望。

????埃爾森漢斯的方法雖然可能能夠減少矛盾的數(shù)量，但卻沒有解決這樣一個(gè)問題：如何應(yīng)對(duì)與其他人公開的矛盾，最終獲得所謂的“雙贏”。

????I once led an offsite with the top 100 leaders at a multinational chemical company. I was immediately struck by how humble, friendly, and polite this room full of engineers was. At one point, I decided to take a risk and let them know what a pleasant bunch of people they were, but that I wondered if their polite exterior might be masking conflicts that were simmering below the surface. A ripple of laughter went through the crowd. Embarrassed recognition?

????When I asked them to rate the quality of their relationships within the company, 88% responded that they belonged in the "dysfunctional family" category, full of unacknowledged conflicts.

????I wasn't surprised. Conflict avoidance is one of the most common -- and divisive --behaviors my company encounters at the companies we work with. Instead of dealing with differences of opinion and working collaboratively, people choke back what they think until the boss has left the meeting, or when they are alone with a clique of like-minded colleagues. Teams break down into small, polarized groups that pursue their own agendas.

????Yet despite what seems like an epidemic of unhealthy behavior, a lot of management literature flirts with condoning such practices.

????In fact, most of today's literature about managing workplace conflict is based on a 40-year-old model developed by Kenneth Thomas and Ralph Kilmann in 1974, which cites avoidance as one of five main strategies people use to deal with conflict. But Thomas and Kilmann make clear that conflict avoidance prevents teams from collaborating on important decisions, which simply don't get made. That's hardly an effective strategy.

????Few people enjoy confronting others. Just the thought of conflict sparks anxiety in most people. Yet such problems don't go away by themselves. They grow and fester.

????So what can you do?

????Put everyone in the same boat

????The first step is to make sure individual business units' goals are aligned with the organization's goals. The larger the firm and the more diverse its products, the less likely these are to be aligned -- and the more likely competing goals are causing friction between employees. Make sure everyone's incentives are tied to the enterprise goals. Just telling employees that they need to put enterprise goals first is useless if their scorecard is solely dependent on the success of their little fiefdom. Ah, I mean business unit.

????Lynn Elsenhans, former CEO of Sunoco, notes that aligning employee goals and incentives with enterprise targets will level the playing field and make everyone part of the conversation.

????"People may not, at the beginning, like each other, trust each other, or even think that the other person is worthy," says Elsenhans, "but if you make it the norm that everyone is accountable to the enterprise -- and that we come together to discuss problems and options for solving those problems -- you'll start to build a climate of mutual trust and respect. People begin to look at things differently. 'We are going to help each other to be successful so that the enterprise is successful.'" A natural outcome, she adds, is that people begin to feel they don't want to let each other down.

????While Elsenhans' approach has the potential to reduce the number of conflicts that arise, it doesn't address the issue of how to have an out-in-the-open conflict with someone -- and come out feeling the warm glow of the proverbial "win-win."