The Value of a Robust Exchange

When you have intelligent people working in an organisation together, every day, you are going to see some differences of opinion.

What happens when opposing ideas occur can either be leveraged positively, or not.

Trust and its presence in a relationship is an important determinant of conflict. High performing school leaders (at all levels) are those who can engage in conversations that encourage conflicting views.

“They understand the difference between inter-personal conflict and conflicting views on contentious topics. They lead teams where debate is welcome, with the objective to arrive at the best and most truthful course of action,” says Brendan Maher, education expert and Leading Teams Facilitator.

“The opposite is also true. Underperforming teams often live in what I describe as being, ‘Busy, Happy, Good’. Everyone is really ‘busy’, people seem ‘happy enough’ and therefore life at school is ‘good.’ Challenging topics are avoided because we might upset someone and consequently, nothing changes. Inertia becomes the norm, as does the acceptance of mediocrity.

“We often reference Patrick Lencioni’s work on this topic. Lencioni encourages us to move along his ‘Conflict Continuum’ to what he describes as the 'Ideal Conflict Point’, where robust, genuine conversations can and do take place. We acknowledge, just as he does, that humans can at times move beyond the ideal conflict point. However, if strong professional relationships exist, this can be addressed and corrected.”

Lencioni also notes that some teams will stray to the opposite end of the continuum towards ‘Mean Spirited Attacks’. This is the murky territory where inappropriate, counter-productive and possibly even illegal conflict takes place.

If contentious issues slip into the realm of hostility, anger and frustration, it is time to reflect on the extent to which strong professional relationships have been built and whether a set of agreed behaviours has been adhered to.

“The absence of trust and respect in relationships will block open dialogue, the development of clear understandings and commitment within a team,” says Maher.

These kinds of strategies can be ported to the students and applied to enhance the school environment and discipline.

A school-wide culture guided by a common purpose, a belief in strong professional relationships, adherence to a set of agreed behaviours and a willingness to engage in genuine conversations can be normalised.

“I was fortunate to be appointed as the founding principal of a new school in the city of Ballarat in 2007. It was the first new primary school of any denomination in the City of Ballarat for close to twenty years. This appointment was a career highlight for me, and an almighty challenge!

“As I began working with my team, we adopted a mantra from a wonderful Scottish academic from the University of Glasgow, James Conroy, who I’d had the good fortune to meet. We set out with the common purpose to ensure that every child who entered our school grew to realise that ‘they were the author of their own future.’”

Five-year-olds, staff, parents, friends and grandparents alike came to appreciate that by living the mantra of ‘We are The Authors of Our Own Future’ and using it as the overarching lens that informed all decisions ensured a great depth of buy-in to what became a unique culture.

“Whenever we explored anything as staff members, as a classroom or community group, we began by considering how our decisions would support and challenge us to help all stakeholders author a better future,” says Maher.

A culture of constructive conflict starts with senior leadership but must filter through the entire school community if constructive conflict is to be normalised.

Creating a genuinely held common purpose, a set of agreed behaviours and a culture where honest conversations, including conflicting viewpoints are welcome, can only happen on the back of strong professional relationships - and these take considerable time and effort to nurture, and sometimes even create from scratch.

Whether a school is school stuck in artificial harmony can be identified by looking at the data. Data can indicate when significant numbers of staff, parents or students are ‘sitting on the fence’ on contentious issues such as the manner in which we manage disagreement in this school, levels of engagement, voice to leadership, clarity and openness in communication, etc.

‘Neither here nor there’ responses can demonstrate ambivalence and compliance. In these circumstances, the mutual trust and respect that underpins open dialogue, clearer shared understandings and total commitment are missing.

Every school will have a set of values that are said to underpin all that they do in the school. But if you were to ask a selection of staff, students and/or parents at the school what these are, many wouldn’t have a clue. They might respond, “I read them when I first joined the school but now, I’m just too busy to consider them.”

“I encourage school leadership teams, staff teams and school communities to ask themselves some fundamental questions. If ‘Respect’, ‘Compassion’, ‘Boldness’, or ‘Honesty’ is a value at our school, what does it look like, sound like and feel like on a day-to-day, week-to-week basis?

“Be brave enough to ask, ‘Does our rhetoric match our reality when it comes to living our values?’ and 'When we are under pressure, what do our values look like, sound like and feel like?’

"Underpinning preparedness to address conflicting viewpoints is a desire to genuinely listen to the perspectives of others, even those voices which at times can irritate us. It’s important to question one another, consult and collaborate with the intention of making decisions that help one’s entire community author a rich, healthy, peaceful and rewarding future for the benefit of all, and not just the most vocal."