Do You Make these 7 Leadership Mistakes When Dealing with Conflict?

Victor (not his real name) is a local church pastor who sought me out for a consultation. By the time we managed to work out a time to meet he'd been in conflict with some congregational members for eight months. He had been in his mid-sized congregation for three and a half years and thought everything was going well. That is, until he began confronting personal attacks, hearing about "secret" meetings, and noticing changes in some of his church leaders' behavior toward him.

After struggling for eight months and not getting anywhere, Victor starting seeking help in understanding what was going on and what to do about it. To his credit, Victor was also seeking to understand his own functioning in the midst of conflict. He started to recognize long-seated patterns in how he responded to the difficult experience at his church. It did not take long for Victor to name seven mistakes he was making in how he was dealing with conflict. Victor actually wrote down the list of the seven mistakes he was making and worked hard at consciously changing the way he was behaving.

Why are all systems so alike?

During the past three months I've run the gamut in types of organizations during consultations--congregations, non-profits, theological schools, a small business. My experience reminded me of those conversations about how universal the Dilbert cartoons are in hitting the mark regardless of where people work—-from a large corporate firm to a small business, from a for-profit conglomerate to a non-profit. It begs the question, “Why are all systems so similar?”

We hear hints about this apparent truth here and there. “Business is business, whether you’re manufacturing cogs, selling widgets, or selling a service.” I’ve been in certain leadership training seminars where the room held representatives from all manner of contexts, with corporate CEOs to clergy attending to the same latest ideas about how to lead better and manage more effectively in their organizations.

I have some hunches as to why all systems are so similar:

Relationships systems follow universal rules. I first stumbled across this insight when I picked up a book titled How to Run Any Organization. I still have in on my bookshelf, and I must admit it has served me well in all the contexts I’ve worked in: school administration, corporate, congregation, non-profits, etc. The second place where that idea finds support is in Bowen Systems Theory, which identified universal rules applicable to all relationship systems, from family to business; from government to church. Because relationship systems self-organize according to universal principles, we can expect to see certain characteristics that are shared universally. These include: the function of leadership, the presence of anxiety and the manifestation of reactivity, the emergence of homeostatic dynamics, the presence of reciprocal dynamics (overfunctioning-underfunctioning, seperateness-togetherness, etc.), the emergence of systemic patterns that serve a variety of purposes.

Systems of a kind will tend to share the same organizational metrics as indicators of effectiveness, vitality, and viability. The metrics for "educational effectiveness" published by educational institutions--whether universities or theological schools--are similar, if not identical. The metrics used by non-profit organizations (e.g., those related to social value, market potential, and sustainability) apply to organizations of that kind regardless of size, mission, or location. While that makes common sense, what is surprising is how many leaders and board members of those organizations would not be able to identify those metrics if asked.

Complexity emerges from simple rules. While systems and organizations may appear different on the surface they seem all to arise and operation on fundamentally simple rules. The most complex corporation started small and is effective to the extent it can “follow the rules” of its nature. Large congregations look different from small congregations, but ask any pastor and he or she will likely confirm that no matter the size of the congregation, leaders tend to deal with the same problems. A large theological school looks different from a small seminary, but a room full of deans from schools across the spectrum of denominations, geographical areas, and school size will all share about the same challenges. And, they'll immediately chuckle at the comment, "We all have the same Faculty."

Human nature is the same everywhere. Culture, race, ethnicity, and epochs mediate the universal principles that direct relationship systems, but it doesn’t take much to scratch below the surface and discover that human nature is the same everywhere, and it has been for a long while. Perhaps the best place to see this is in narrative-—those stories that are so good about depicting the human spirit and its interior world. Reading the works of the Greek poets and playwrights to Shakespeare, to Checkoff and Dostoevsky to Mark Twain will serve to confirm that we humans laugh, cry, yearn, fear, and hope for the same things—-and always have. Idealists who want to create utopias and social organizations that are “totally new” often forget that those new creations will always be populated by the same old people.

The brain is the same everywhere. There may be a biological cause as to why all systems seem so similar. The organic brain, its patterns and its epistemology, are universally the same for everyone everywhere in whatever culture. Hence the educational truism, “Everybody everywhere learns the same way.” For example, barring neurological anomalies or organic brain syndromes, every person’s brain learns language the same way. And, dismissing claims of clairvoyance and ESP, everybody’s brain processes phenomenon the same way, for the most part. Given that fact, we can expect that when a group of individuals gathers together to form Group A, they’re pretty much going to be more similar than different to the group of individuals that gather together for form Group B. That’s a great convenience to teachers who find they can effectively re-cycle a well-designed courses year after year with little change and still achieve desired learning outcomes with little variance from the norm. This insight can help ease the transition for leaders moving from one context to another is a system of a kind (from one congregation to another, from one theological school to another). Culture and context will mediate some things--like emotional process, practices, ethos, and values--but all systems of a kind tend to function in much the same ways.

What are some of your hunches as to why systems are so similar?

Israel Galindo is Associate Dean for Lifelong Learning at the Columbia Theological Seminary. Formerly, he was Dean at the Baptist Theological Seminary at Richmond. He is the author of the bestseller, The Hidden Lives of Congregations (Alban), Perspectives on Congregational Ministry (Educational Consultants), and A Family Genogram Workbook (Educational Consultants), with Elaine Boomer and Don Reagan. Galindo contributes to the Wabash Center's blog for theological school deans.

Five Essential Functions of Effective Leaders

Effective leaders, in any organization, are those who can provide the leadership functions their systems need of them. This concept puts on its head any personality-based notion of leadership (charisma, intelligence, gender, race, ethnicity, pedigree, beliefs, looks, confidence, etc.). In other words, leadership is a function of the system, not a product of personality. The counter-intuitive reality is that healthy organizations have strong leaders—conversely, it is not always the case that strong leaders have healthy, or effective, organizations. The question then, is, “What function will I need to provide to be an effective educational leader?”

Reviewing the literature on leadership yields five essential functions of leaders. These five essential functions have appeared in different forms over the years, but they consistently comprise the "top five" on lists about what effective leaders do. They are:

1. Having a vision and communicating it well

2. Articulating goals and identifying strategies

3. Creating an adaptive culture open to change

4. Monitoring progress

5. Providing necessary interventions.

All leaders need to provide those essential functions--whether in a congregation, school, non-profit organization, or business. However, there’s no one best way to provide them. WHAT a leader needs to provide is clear; HOW a particular leader chooses to go about it is a product of both context and personality.

The challenge of the complex nature of the job of leaders, with the multi-faceted dimensions and demands of an organization, calls for an astonishing wide-ranging skills set: from interpersonal relational skills to high-level analytical and intuitive-interpretive skills. Organizational leaders, in whatever role, need to cultivate and apply a wide repertoire of cognitive styles in order to carry out the job, sometimes, in the course of a single day! They need often to switch from abstract, symbolic perspectives to a concrete, realistic perspective from one moment to the next. They may start the day with internal vision-casting in a Zen-like state while driving to the office, only to be engulfed in managerial problem-solving within twenty minutes of sitting at the desk, then, end the day dealing with interpersonal conflicts in the midst of emotional reactivity.

Effective educational leaders do well to remember that in the midst of the urgency and the press of the daily triage, there are only five functions that will ultimately determine their effectiveness. Five things make the difference, for they are the essential functions that the system needs of its leader. It is not much of an overstatement to say that, at the end of the day, all else is distraction. In fact, what dysfunctional systems are very good at is distracting its leader from focusing on and providing the essential functions!

To what extent are you providing the five essential educational functions of a dean?

What things distract you from investing time, thought, and effort on the five essential functions?

Are you stronger in providing one function over others? Which functions do you need to work on increasing your competence?

Dysfunctional systems are adept at sabotaging a leader’s focus on the five functions. Are you able to identify ways your system and context inhibits your effectiveness in one or more of the five essential functions?

Israel Galindo is Associate Dean for Lifelong Learning at the Columbia Theological Seminary. Formerly, he was Dean at the Baptist Theological Seminary at Richmond. He is the author of the bestseller, The Hidden Lives of Congregations (Alban), Perspectives on Congregational Ministry (Educational Consultants), and A Family Genogram Workbook (Educational Consultants), with Elaine Boomer and Don Reagan. Galindo contributes to the Wabash Center's blog for theological school deans.

Truisms worth remembering during times of acute anxiety

All systems experience episodes of acute anxiety but systems manifest it differently. Relatively stable, resilient and high-functioning systems seem able to respond to episodes of acute anxiety. In contrast chronically anxious systems which lack resilience will tend to be reactive in the face of acute anxiety. That is, they have little tolerance for challenges, lack capacity for self-regulation or for imaginative responses to handle times of acute anxiety.

Chronically anxious systems share the following characteristics:

(1) They make someone in the system responsible for someone else's functioning

(2) They are structured to inhibit the effectiveness of its leaders

(3) They develop reactive, rigid, and predictable patterns for dealing with anxiety

(4) They tend to spawn anxiety triangles. 

While it is more helpful to assess the emotional process at work at the systemic level it can be helpful to observe how symptomology is being played out in the individuals in the system. When facing reactivity at the systemic level congregational leaders will need to respond to how it affects the individuals in the system. Needless to say, those individuals in the system who have a low capacity for self-differentiation and for managing their own anxiety will tend to be the most symptomatic (i.e., the ones who "act out").

Symptomology in Anxious Systems

Here are some truisms worth remembering when dealing with reactive individuals in a system going through acute anxiety:

Some people just need to be mad. They want their pain.

It’s a waste of time to try to dialogue with an angry person.

Some people just need to be “right,” regardless of the cost.

A chronically anxious system in the grips of acute anxiety has a tremendous capacity for self-sabotage. There will be no lack of volunteers willing to lead the way.

Anxiety spawns triangles—-even over distances.

Anxious people lose the capacity to practice grace and will assume the worst of others.

Persons who are "stuck" will believe what they want to believe. No amount of earnestness or data will convince them otherwise.

It only takes one willful anxious person to kick up the reactivity in an anxious system if the healthier ones in the system do not respond.

A leadership vacuum leaves a system with little resource for self-regulation or vision.

Anxiety spreads like a virus in a system that lacks immunity provided by leadership.

During times of acute anxiety emotionality trumps rationality, even in a system full of “smart” people.

Immature people will take any opportunity to work out their unresolved issues if given a forum.

Trust is a gossamer thread; once severed it’s almost impossible to regain.

Systems that are in reactivity tend to lack a capacity to hear the message or follow the leaders it needs.

People are hooked on the myth of information—the notion that if one has all the information it will make a difference to what needs to be done; or that more data will bring insight.

While information reduces anxiety, but for anxious people, so will misinformation.

Chronically anxious systems facilitate regression if unchecked.

No matter how hard you think you’ve tried to communicate process, most people will not hear most of it.

When people give in to paranoia, guilt by association carries more weight than observable facts.

When people lack data, they’ll fill in the blanks.

Perception is people’s reality. And most people will see things only from their frame of reference and from their position in the system.

The job of a leader in a system caught up in acute anxiety is twofold: first, self-regulation, and second, being attentive to the emotional process in the system and providing the function it needs of its leader.  Depending on the circumstance, the function of the leader can be anything from providing a corrective to acting out behavior; re-framing the issues from a principled, values, and missional perspective; empowering the calmer, more mature, more centered persons in the system; or merely providing the presence of the leader in the system (staying visible and emotionally connected). 

The good new is that acute anxiety, and the reactivity it engenders is episodic. Its shelf life is as long as the length of the crisis. Leaders can be encourage, also, by the fact that every system has some elements of health and maturity even in the midst of acute anxiety and crises. When the leader is able to focus on those, she or he can be surprised at the capacity for some in the system to step up to leadership or be a resource to the system. 

Israel Galindo is Associate Dean for Lifelong Learning at the Columbia Theological Seminary. Formerly, he was Dean at the Baptist Theological Seminary at Richmond. He serves as faculty coach for the  Leadership in Ministry Workshops, a clergy leadership development program from a systems perspective.  He is the author of the bestseller, The Hidden Lives of Congregations (Alban), Perspectives on Congregational Ministry (Educational Consultants), and A Family Genogram Workbook (Educational Consultants), with Elaine Boomer and Don Reagan. Galindo contributes to the Wabash Center's blog for theological school deans.

Fixing the Right Thing

Once, a colleague at work stopped by my office to review a communication glitch he was having with a staff person I supervised. The nature of the staff person’s work interfaced with my colleague’s office, but they’d had a history of finding it difficult to work together.

I listened to my colleague for about five minutes as he talked about the staff person, Susan (not her real name), and the problem. I noted that the focus of the content of his talk was Susan (her personality, behavior, etc.), and only peripherally did he identify what the problem was. I discerned that, once again, these two persons were stuck and I was being invited into an anxiety triangle.

Fortunately, my colleague is an emotionally mature person and we have a good working relationship. A student of systems theory, my colleague is a relatively level-headed, non-anxious person. But like many of us, some persons seem to push a reactivity button within him. When Susan pushed my colleague’s reactivity button, the resulting anxiety caused him to triangle someone into the matter, and I was in the position to be the natural candidate. Given our open working relationship I was confident in challenging him on how to approach the situation.

When he finally finished sharing a list of complaints about the staff person in question I asked him, “Can I ask you a systems question?”

“Yes,” he said, now on alert.

“Are you trying to fix Susan or are you trying to fix the problem?” I asked.

My colleague immediately recognized the emotional process at play. He realized that his reactivity was causing him to overfocus on Susan, and that he was triangling me into the situation by hinting that, as her supervisor, I needed to “fix” Susan. With that insight, we were able to shift the conversation from Susan to identifying what the problem was that needed to be fixed, in this case, clarifying a procedural matter between two offices.

Reactivity often manifests itself in anxious behaviors: an overfocus on personalities, a misdirection of an issue, projection, triangling someone into the unresolved issues between two persons, scapegoating, etc. Because I was able to regulate my own anxiety in the midst of the meeting, I was able to ask myself “What’s really going on here? What’s the issue?” I was able to help my colleague  re-frame the problem. He was also able to get in touch with his own reactivity and realized how it was manifesting itself in triangling me into the matter by asking me to take responsibility for another person’s behavior and asking me to  “fix” that person.

If I had been unfocused that day, things may have gone differently. I may have gotten caught up in the anxiety and reactivity, accepted the invitation to enter the triangle, made Susan the IP (Identified Patient), and my colleague and I could have launched into a futile project of trying to “fix Susan.” Furthermore, the real problem needing attention would have gone unresolved, which would serve only to increase the frustration and anxiety.

When faced with reactivity it is helpful to monitor one’s anxiety and cerebrate rather than ventilate by asking oneself questions of discernment:

• What is going on here, really?
• Can I identify the triangle?
• Do I need to accept the invitation into a triangle?
• Am I responsible for alleviating another person’s frustration, discomfort, or anxiety?
• Am I being asked to take responsibility for someone else’s behavior?
• Do we want to try to fix a person or fix a problem?

Israel Galindo is Associate Dean for Lifelong Learning at the Columbia Theological Seminary. Formerly, he was Dean at the Baptist Theological Seminary at Richmond. He is the author of the bestseller, The Hidden Lives of Congregations (Alban), Perspectives on Congregational Ministry (Educational Consultants), and A Family Genogram Workbook (Educational Consultants), with Elaine Boomer and Don Reagan. Galindo contributes to the Wabash Center's blog for theological school deans.

Six responses of well-differentiated leaders

Functioning at a high level of differentiation is the golden fleece for most congregational leaders who are students of BFST. Especially in times of acute systemic anxiety and symptomatic reactivity, effective leaders will work on focusing on the repertoire that will help them navigate the storm. In no particular order, here’s a six-action repertoire differentiated leaders tend to follow:

1. Monitoring their own internal emotional process. Differentiated leaders are self-aware of the experience of their feelings, of how anxiety is being processed physically and emotionally, and awareness of the role family of origin dynamics are coming into play in the situation.
2. Observing their functioning. Differentiated leaders are centered, clear, and responsive (emotionally present). They know the cues for when reactivity patterns start kicking in.  For example, overfunctioning or underfunctioning at work and at home, obsessing over issues, fantasizing, or distancing.  
3. Regulating their anxiety. If reactivity patterns begin to manifest (e.g., psychosomatic symptomology), differentiated leaders work on regulating the experience of anxiety and moderate reactivity patterns.
4. Avoiding reactivity. No matter how much they want to, differentiated leaders don’t call that acting out deacon a jerk or tender their resignation letter when frustrated.
5. Getting clarity about their guiding principles and values. Differentiated leaders recall and rehearse their values, goals, principles, and vision (“Remind me again, why did I take this job?”).
6. Seeking out resources. Differentiated leaders are not afraid of asking for help. They avail themselves of their coach or therapist, a spiritual friend, or support group. They don't seek advice about what to do or how to think, but use these resources to navigate through the emotional process in the midst of crises, acute anxiety, or reactivity. 

It may help to write down “The Repertoire” and keep it in your wallet or tape it to your desk at the church office as a reminder for when acute anxiety bubbles up in the system. Acute anxiety will tend to focus on the person in the position of leadership (that’s you), so it will feel personal. The common reaction is to feel under attack or betrayed. When that happens, our most important resource goes out the window: our capacity to think through the problem and realistically assess what is going on in the system. When your brains shuts down in the midst of anxiety, pull out the list to reengage that frontal lobe. 

Three Responses to Differentiation

Assuming we’ve followed “The Repertoire” successfully and have managed to differentiate from out of our position of leadership in the system, we need to also take into consideration its aftermath. Experienced differentiated leaders know enough not to expect anyone to say “Thank you!” But there are three other predictable responses to a leader’s act of self-differentiation in the midst of an anxious system:

1. Those who have the capacity will be able to self-regulate and also begin to self-differentiate. That deacon you wanted to call a jerk may now be saying, “Wow, I don’t know what happened to me. I got caught up in something and went crazy for a moment there.” These people are now resources for you and the system.
2. A second group of persons will tend to fuse with you. A self-differentiated leader is “attractive,” even to those who lack a capacity for self-definition. Fusion can be seductive. It feels great to have a room full of people nod at your every word and eagerly agree with your every opinion. However, this group of people are not a resource to the system—the next loudest voice can just as easily redirect their passions.
3. The third group of persons will be the ones who will withdraw or cut off from you. Clarity about one’s stance will feel like a line drawn on the sand to some folks. Self-definition demands a response and responsibility on the part of others. For those who lack resilience in thinking, or who are too insecure or too rigid in their beliefs, cutting off may be their only repertoire for dealing with challenge.

Israel Galindo is Associate Dean for Lifelong Learning at the Columbia Theological Seminary. Formerly, he was Dean at the Baptist Theological Seminary at Richmond. He is the author of the bestseller, The Hidden Lives of Congregations (Alban), Perspectives on Congregational Ministry (Educational Consultants), and A Family Genogram Workbook (Educational Consultants), with Elaine Boomer and Don Reagan. Galindo contributes to the Wabash Center's blog for theological school deans.

Don't do these 10 things when dealing with reactivity

All leaders will deal with reactivity at one point or another. It can be caused by a proposed change from the leader, it may be the result of direct and necessary action taken by the leader, or, it can come out of the blue. Leaders of necessity will have to deal with reactivity, but here are ten things NOT to do when reactivity makes its appearance:

1. Confront it head on. Taking on reactivity head on rarely is an effective tactic. For one thing we will find ourselves addressing the reactivity rather than its cause. A frontal assault on reactivity is merely reactivity to reactivity. 
2. Maintain an unreasonable faith in reasonableness. Persons caught in the grips reactivity are immune to data, or reasonableness. They are operating out of perceived threat, so their instincts have taken over the rational part of their brain. Allow time for the feeling of threat to pass before attempting a meeting of minds. There will be those who refuse to be reasonable for a number of reasons. The rules are different when dealing with those who refuse to reason. 
3. Question or ascribe motive to poor behavior. Because reactivity is a product of by-passing cognition it's not helpful to question people's motives. They are, literally, not in their right mind. Realize that people in acting out their reactivity are not at their best and are not acting out of principled thinking. Most likely, persons caught in the grip of reactivity don't know why they are acting the way they are.
4. Take it personally. Ninety-eight percent of the time, the reactivity that comes your way is not about you, even when it feels like it. Occupying the leader position means you're the point person for reactivity, it comes with the job. Some reactivity will be projection of other people's issues, perceptions, or unresolved conflicts. Some will come your way just because it's convenient to dump it on your desk. Some will come to your just because people are feeling powerless and need someone to "do something" about it. 
5. Make it personal. Being on the receiving end of reactivity comes with the job. Often you'll be surprised at who vents frustration on you. Others will engage in a pattern of reactivity with you as the focus. Either way, focusing on the emotional process (people's functioning in the system) rather than focusing on the person, or personality, will help you get to the cause behind the reactivity. Personal attacks not withstanding, leaders do well not to take systemic problems worse by making it personal.  
6. Neglect to assess your part of it. There are fives sides to every story, and three you'll never find out about. There will be occasions when the reactivity (and accusations) leveled at you will, to some degree, actually be "about you." Our tendency will be to deny culpability, deflect blame, made excuses, avoid the discomfort of the situation, or simply convince ourselves we are not part of the problem. Mature and effective leaders have capacity to self-assess honestly their roles in systemic problems, and they are able to sincerely apologize and work at doing better. 
7. Forget to breath. When faced with reactivity we experience threat, and the biological response to it (fight or flight). Give your brain the oxygen it needs to think and reason--it's your most important resource in the midst of reactivity. So, breathe! 
8. Neglect to step back. Whether physically or emotionally, taking a step back from reactivity provides perspective. Taking a step back physically from a person engaged in reactivity helps remove a sense of psychological threat. Thinking to oneself, "Will this matter six months from now," can provide emotional distance and offer perspective to the existentially painful moment. 
9. Let your feelings rule over your principles. Informed values and principles are the two resources that provide correctives in the midst of reactivity. What values guide your relationship with persons--in whatever circumstance? What is your guiding principle when dealing with reactivity? 
10. Forget your place. You are the leader in the system, and you can't forget that. One of the burdens of leadership is that those in leadership do not have the luxury of giving in to the baser emotions. Getting angry, feeling outraged, nurturing feelings of  victim-hood, holding a grudge, and lashing out may be emotionally cathartic, but once a leader gives in to them he or she ceases to be the leader in the system. When others in the system are loosing control of their emotions, that's the time a system needs its leader to be the most centered, non-reactive, and principled person in the system. 

Israel Galindo is Associate Dean for Lifelong Learning at the Columbia Theological Seminary. Formerly, he was Dean at the Baptist Theological Seminary at Richmond. He is the author of the bestseller, The Hidden Lives of Congregations (Alban), Perspectives on Congregational Ministry (Educational Consultants), and A Family Genogram Workbook (Educational Consultants), with Elaine Boomer and Don Reagan. Galindo contributes to the Wabash Center's blog for theological school deans.