On a recent workplace visit, Tom, a team leader in an auto plant, cut off his colleague’s point in an important meeting. This subsequent shutdown heightened distrust between staff. Before the meeting adjourned, Tom’s manager threatened Tom with replacement if the team failed to reach a decision. This last-minute screeching alarm increased the pressure on a crisis-ridden situation. This regulatory pressure might explain the extremely rash decision making throughout this debate that he exhibited.
With just three minutes remaining in the hearing, the clock was ticking. The one thing that Tom saw was that they had not yet come to a conclusion. His actions have drawn plenty of criticism, focusing on the very real possibility that they caused others to feel disrespected. Observers noted that emotions ran high as he interrupted a colleague who was attempting to contribute just before the vote.
The missive has similarities in personal relationships, especially in how people deal with confrontation in workplace discourse. Tessa West, a social psychologist and author of “Jerks at Work: Toxic Coworkers and What to Do About Them,” emphasizes the importance of emotional intelligence in such scenarios. She insists that emotional intelligence is more than just showing and understanding emotions. It also means knowing when to introduce them into the discussion.
Further to Tom’s initiative, we’ve just learned about something Kate did recently. Kate recently planned a big bash, but she wisely decided to leave a number of her colleagues off her invitation list. This exclusion has led to a sense of ostracism amongst the excluded, adding another layer of tension to an already fraught workplace environment.
West observes that the manner in which people process emotions and their internal narrative while engaging in conflict often makes or breaks workplace interactions. Everyone is taught to communicate what they’re against before they communicate what they’re for, she said, but this approach only deepens divides.
“I made some assumptions about why you did what you did, but I’d love to hear your side.” – Tessa West
Her method fosters a collaborative conversation without the urge to get defensive. This approach goes a long way towards mitigating misunderstandings born of apparent snubs or accidental discourteousness.
In romantic relationships, similar dynamics occur where partners can disagree on whether specific events took place or how they felt about them. The extent of misalignment in these perceptions frequently foreshadows well-being outcomes, as well as day-to-day feelings of stress and anxiety. West suggests that resisting the urge to “prove” a partner wrong can lead to more productive discussions, fostering understanding rather than animosity.
For Tom, perhaps the most affected person at that meeting will request a public apology. They felt like their voices were being ignored and that they were being disrespected. The people excluded by Kate may deserve recognition of their feelings and frustrations about what she is doing.
“Now that we understand each other a bit more, how are you feeling about this?” – Tessa West
This question perfectly summarizes West’s approach to social change and conflict. Being able to appreciate and articulate the other side’s perspective is critical. It furthers communication efforts and creates a welcoming atmosphere for all.
Situations like Tom and Kate’s remind us what a difficult space work relationships are to navigate. Emotional intelligence, or the ability to understand and manage emotions, is essential for conflict resolution. By recognizing and addressing the impacts of their actions on others, both individuals can work towards rebuilding trust within their teams.