Few of us would ever say we love conflicts. More often, we long for harmony and peace. But can - or should - there be constant harmony? I don’t think so.
When we take a closer look at how we’re wired as human beings, it becomes clear that disappointment and conflict are just as likely as harmony and happiness.
Think about it: even our own needs and feelings can be difficult for us to recognize—so how can we expect others to identify them and respond in the right way? And even if they do understand what we need, they may choose not to meet those needs because they have their own, completely opposing ones. A real dilemma.
Misunderstandings are just as common, given that communication is such a vast and complicated field. Saying the wrong thing is often more likely than saying the right one. Hearing the wrong thing might be more likely than hearing the right one.
In other words, we’re constantly clearing up misunderstandings and speaking up for our needs. That in itself could be called conflict - but it’s an important kind. There can be no true personal fulfilment without actively standing up for ourselves and helping to shape the way we relate to the people around us. In that sense, conflicts serve a meaningful, even necessary, purpose.
When we take a closer look at organizations, it quickly becomes clear that conflicts of interest are inevitable - between employees in different roles and between entire departments. Take a traditional setup: finance wants to cut costs, marketing wants to launch campaigns to boost reach, and sales wants to hire a new team member. In many classic organizations with clearly defined roles and departmental boundaries, these boundaries are designed with such tensions in mind. Negotiating competing interests is, in itself, a form of conflict. Is it avoidable? In my view, no - in fact, it’s often by design.
Agile organizations work a little differently. Instead of being split into functional departments, they’re organized into interdisciplinary product or project teams. This means that many of the conflicts that would normally occur between functions get handled within the team itself. For example, a sales specialist on the team might push for more marketing spend, while the design expert argues for more user testing - but the budget only covers one.
In short, organizational conflicts aren’t something you can eliminate. The only real choice is where they are going to happen inside the team or at its boundaries.
Trying to eliminate conflicts from our daily lives or our work environment is one of the many illusions we humans cling to.
I believe we should see and accept conflicts for what they truly are: the necessary immune responses of human coexistence and collaboration. Conflicts serve to:
- achieve personal fulfilments by standing up for one’s own needs;
- spark change - in relationships, in organizations, and in society - by updating rules, ending unhealthy situations, questioning value systems or enabling innovation.
In short: without conflicts, nothing would function anymore.
This text first appeared in my newsletter "It's innovation Wednesday". It is published once a month. For subscription click here