Any HR consultants/trainers/troubleshooters? Need help on conflict resolution / group dynamics issue...

[WilfSell]

I am going back to work soon and - gulp! - one of my first jobs will be to convene a session for my colleagues, part of which will be airing and dealing with some issues which are preventing the group from working well. And developing more trust and teamwork...

There's lots of bitching behind backs, moaning rather than solving problems, resistance blah blah blah.

I am not a trainer as such but often do people stuff reasonably well. but I could do with a fews tips for helping to get through and resolve these things without making anyone even more resistant etc..

The job we work in means they will all be resistant to being asked to do daft bonding tasks (cynical old tossers university lecturers) or even much small group work (since they do this on a daily basis with students). But I just don't want it to descend into another moan session, bureaucratic meeting or get hijacked by some of the dominant characters we have to deal with.

Do you have any suggestions for activities and what to definitely avoid; and/or pointers to books/reading/materials I could buy to help me in this task?

Very grateful in anticipation...

wilfsell tricky one without knowing more about the team.

There is loads of stuff about team dynamics, theories on how groups work, identifying different types of team member, all that stuff. Do you think they might be interested in looking at some theory stuff?

I think if it were me I'd be trying to facilitate an open, no-blame discussion about what people feel the problems are and getting their ideas on how best to deal with them and move forward. People are obviously much less resistant if they have decided on solutions/actions themselves, all signed up to it, rather than being given exercises to do or too structured a discussion about theories which are often really good but might not be the best starter for a group who might be a bit cynical.

I appreciate what you are saying about it descending into a moaning session or getting hijacked, but keeping a firm grip on it and steering the discussion a bit is part of the role of the facilitator.

What do you think?

Coming from the other side of things, I worked in a very dysfunctional office - mainly because the boss was mad and ran the place like an odd family.

We had a trainer in to deal with the issues, and one thing she did was to run one-to-one interviews with all of us first. We then got the bitching off our chests, she got an insight into the dynamics, and she could then run some training sessions with specific problems - and solutions - in mind.

You probably know some of the issues, but I think defusing all the bitching in advance might well help.

Can't you get someone from your HR department to be a facilitator for you so you have someone who is neutral keeping things constructive during the meeting?

Thanks all. I'm not sure getting one of our HR people in would work but I might ask for advice from them beforehand...

I think the talking one-to-one beforehand is an excellent idea actually: it will help people feel they are setting the agenda and will air grievances in private.

FBB, I think it would help me to read up on some of the stuff about group dynamics, if not the whole group...

Essentially, we are all 'equals', yet some are given workload allocation tasks even though they are often more nominally junior than others. Which means they have lots of responsibility but little actual authority. And the line managers in universities are very unwilling to create conflict by stepping in and telling people what to do. So we're often left to resolve these kinds of things ourselves. Which people do by bitching, except then of course things don't get resolved.

Added to this is an internal competition between the 3 main parts of our job: teaching, research and administration. Different individuals are left to manage the balance by themselves despite a nominally transparent workload model. Some choose to pitch in; some choose to disappear from view, leaving others to clear up after them; some choose to moan about it; some choose to be obstinate and selfish...

It isn't working very well and people have different priorities at a time/economic climate when we need some common ones.

I am hoping to at least clear the air and set communal groundrules. I don't think I can hope for much more than this in one awayday...

Any further advice or reading welcome...

I've got some very interesting stuff about teams in the NHS and resistance to change/blame etc. It is based on a psychotherapy model but it's very interesting and makes sense. It might transpose to your setting. If you are interested email me on louisearscott at hotmail dot com and i will send you a coy.

I like to use De Bono's '6 thinking hats' for facilitating discussion, to try to prevent the emotional non-solution focussed stuff from dominating, and from going round and round in circles. You have to give intro defining the hats and the facilitator needs to call back people who go off the hat that is being discussed.

Red Hat: What is your feeling about how this team operates (get the shit off the liver first) "it makes me feel angry/frustrated/dissatisfied/like quitting)

Yellow Hat: What works well with the team at the moment (it is not alllll shit is it?) We have some team members with reeallly good experience/qualifications/understanding of the business) "focus on the positive keeps things from getting too ugly too fast)

Black Hat: What is not working? Try to keep the red hat out of it but let people air their critical thinking. "Our results/credibility are below par ..."

etc etc with White, Blue and especially Green which is the action planning part of the process. It sounds like it will be too much to get through in one session.

Be aware of what part of the grieving process people are in i.e, Shock, Anger, Rejection/Denial, Acceptance, How to move forward. I think the 1:1's are a great idea and will help you gauge this.

Above all people need to come up with the solution ideas themselves in order to own them and commit to them. In regard of personality clash issues I think it is important to acknowledge them and then accept that you just have to work successfully with people, they don't have to be your best friend. HTH

I don't envy you! I assujme you are a lecturer too? Why are you specifically being asked to facilitate this? Your HoD should be the one resolving issues.

Titchy, I am but we are bit leaderless at the mo and our new structure means the HoD is actually too uninvolved in our section.

I'm taking the bull by the horns so to speak as I am one of the longest standing members and indeed more senior among lots of new and bewildered staff...

Good luck! The new and bewildered ones will probably be Ok - it's the long standing ones with 'history' you need to worry about!

Wilfsell I would strongly advise you to consider asking someone outside this immediate circle to do this or at least help you do it, I do think it would be more successful if you do that. If HR can't help, consider a senior manager from elsewhere in the organisation? Especially if you are technically all equal and all colleagues.

I think the 1:1s for airing of individual grievances and whinging are a good idea but again I think an outsider would be better for this than you as a colleague (even though you are long-standing and senior).

Having a look at Tuckman on the development and stages of teams might be useful, and Belbin on team roles. Each person doing the Belbin questionnaire and identifying which of the team roles they fill might be a useful starting point, and discussing the Tuckman model, what stage everyone thinks the team is at and how to move it on might be good as well. Google both of them for useful resources on those.

I do strongly recommend you have a chat with your HR/training team. They ought to have literature on Belbin and Tuckman and access to the Belbin questionnaire, and even if they can't facilitate the session for you, or you would rather they didn't, they may have useful advice, particularly given their knowledge and understanding of the situation, context and individuals concerned which we don't have.

thanks flowery - I'll follow up the refs. i've actually emailed my HR link manager to ask for help/advice...

I'm not vastly experienced in this area, but when we run sessions for innovation, one of the other key things is to be very clear up front about what the objectives of the session are.

You can then also ask for everyone present to give you a wishlist about what they would like to cover/get out of the day - so they are buying into the process, as well as alerting you to any other issues that have to be covered.

Good luck - I don't envy you!

Doesn't sound good to me because they are probably all in competition for funds, etc. aren't they?

sorry too

chocbiscuits, there is a certain amount of internal competition between staff, if not always for funds, at least for time to do the higher status parts of the job (research). And there's a big split between those who are seen (and see themselves) as the 'grafters' who get on and do the main business of seeing students, running programmes, doing admin and those who want to focus on research at the expense of teaching and other staff (or so it is perceived).

But a lot of this - in my opinion - is merely lack of communication and misunderstanding of what is really going on for both 'sides'. I have taken this on because I have been out of the loop for two years on a research project and on maternity leave, so I am kind of neutral as far as the current team goes (ie I don't have a lot of history with any of them). But I do understand the risks of a team member doing this, so i am going to look at alternatives. Unfortunately I don't think we have any funds to bring anyone in and our HR team are fairly caught up with other stuff at present. I do have a mate who is a trainer and coach though - perhaps I can drag her in as a favour...?