Hello, and welcome to another Parallel Project Training podcast. This episode is based on the APM, PMQ syllabus for exams starting in September 2024. My name’s Ruth Phillips, and I’m joined by Lisa Regan, one of Parallel’s senior trainers. Today, we’re going to be talking about conflict resolution. Welcome to the podcast, Lisa.
I’m happy to be here, not in conflict, but talking about it.
Yes, hopefully, there won’t be too much conflict between us as we discuss this! In the podcast, we’ve been going through the syllabus, looking at the learning objectives and outcomes for each topic. Let’s now focus on what APM expects us to understand about conflict resolution. The learning objective here is to understand conflict resolution as the ability to identify and address differences between individuals or interest groups. That’s a nice definition of conflict, don’t you think?
Absolutely. As a former project manager myself, conflict is just part of working life. It has to be, because we’re dealing with people, and people are people, as they say. If you ask any project manager for examples of conflict on their projects, every one of them will have a list. I’m really glad conflict resolution is included in the syllabus, as it’s such a crucial skill for project management.
I couldn’t agree more. Conflict isn’t always addressed in project management courses, as it’s often seen as more of a people issue rather than a process or technique. But as you said, managing conflict within a project is fundamental because it’s not something you can just ignore.
Exactly. And when you look at the project environment, there are larger conflicts at play too. Before we started recording, I was thinking about the tension between projects and business as usual. That tension can contribute to conflict on a bigger scale. It’s not just between individuals on a project but often between the project’s need for change and the stability of the business as usual.
Yes, that’s a great point. Let’s look at the learning outcomes. The first is about knowing the sources of conflict within a project. What would you say are the major sources?
To make it easier, I tend to think about the different stages of the project lifecycle. If we start with the concept phase, conflict here is often around funding. You’re asking the organisation for money, so the conflict tends to be between the project sponsor and the organisation. For example, the project might request a certain budget, but the organisation can only provide a different amount. There could also be conflict between projects competing for the same resources or funding.
Yes, and that’s both within and outside of the project. So that’s conflict in the concept phase, but what about the next stage, definition?
In the definition stage, conflict can centre around the project manager, who becomes more involved with the planning. For example, the resource plan can be contentious. Competing for resources is always a challenge, especially when someone else has already booked the resource you need. There’s also scope – determining what’s in and out of scope can be a hot topic during planning.
Definitely, and linked to that, there’s often conflict over quality – agreeing on what “good” looks like for the project. There can be conflict between the project manager, suppliers, and users.
Absolutely. So that’s the definition stage. Moving on to deployment, where the work is happening, deadlines become a source of conflict. People may not meet deadlines, and as a project manager, you have to decide whether to re-plan or renegotiate.
Yes, and in deployment, you might also face conflict when people don’t follow the process, or they fail to deliver the expected quality. The sources of conflict shift as you move through the project lifecycle.
Exactly. By the time you reach transition, where delivery is complete, conflict might arise if users aren’t satisfied with the final product. They may say, “That’s not what I wanted,” or “It doesn’t meet the time, cost, or quality expectations.”
Yes, and that can lead to conflict between the project manager and the users. It’s quite common at this stage, despite all the efforts made in the definition phase to clarify requirements and quality.
And then, in the adoption phase, business-as-usual (BAU) teams might not accept the project’s outputs. You might hear, “The project was supposed to do this, but it doesn’t.” That conflict is crucial because if BAU teams don’t accept the outputs, it’s unlikely the project will fully succeed.
That’s a good segue into the final phase: benefits realisation. Measuring the benefits can also lead to conflict. It often involves the sponsor again, bringing us full circle. How benefits are measured and reported can cause issues if expectations differ.
Exactly. There’s conflict at every stage of the project lifecycle. So the second learning outcome is understanding that conflict can have both positive and negative impacts. We’ve talked about the negative, but what about positive conflict?
Positive conflict allows for debate. I love hearing other people’s opinions and having discussions that open up new perspectives.
Yes, conflict gives you that chance to explore different views. You can’t ignore conflict; it doesn’t just go away. I worked on a project where we called it “creative tension” – a constructive way to allow disagreements and deliver better solutions.
That’s a great way of putting it. Conflict can lead to innovative solutions when it’s handled well.
Definitely. The final learning objective is to know the ways to address conflict, and the syllabus specifically mentions the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument. It’s a two-by-two grid, with the middle option being compromise. The grid looks at your desire to satisfy your own needs versus others’ needs, or in simpler terms, selfish versus selfless.
That makes sense. So, can you talk us through the five conflict modes?
Sure. I like to start with “compete,” which is high on the selfish scale. It’s when someone says, “My way or the highway.” It can be necessary in situations like health and safety or legal compliance, where you need a quick decision.
Yes, I can see why a project sponsor might need to take that approach in some cases.
On the opposite side, we have “accommodate,” which is low on selfishness and high on concern for others. It’s when you say, “Okay, we’ll do it your way,” often to maintain harmony or when the conflict doesn’t matter as much to you.
And then there’s “avoid,” which is low on both scales – essentially ignoring the conflict. It can be useful if emotions are running high and it’s not the right time to address the issue.
Exactly. Then we have “collaborate,” which is the ideal long-term goal, but it takes time, trust, and openness. It’s about finding a win-win solution where both parties are satisfied.
I imagine that takes a lot of trust.
It does. Finally, there’s “compromise,” which is halfway between collaborate and avoid. It’s about finding a middle ground where neither party is fully satisfied, but both can move forward.
That’s really helpful. It gives you a framework to think through the best approach to conflict resolution.
Yes, because we all have a default mode, but it’s not always the right one for every situation.
Well, we’ve managed to discuss conflict resolution with remarkably little conflict! Thank you very much.
Thanks.
