How The Science of Conation Will Enable Your Team to Disagree, Productively.

The recent article by Harvard Business Review¹, “How to Encourage the Right Kind of Conflict on Your Team,” highlights the importance of fostering “task conflict” – disagreements about the work itself – while minimizing “relationship conflict.”  When owners and their leaders are faced with managing change like growth and exit, we must manage information flow day-to-day. How do owners and their team leaders succeed in having healthy debates without letting them devolve into personal attacks?  Conative data provides a powerful framework for navigating change as teams accelerate personal efforts toward growth and succession goals.

Instead of focusing on personalities, Kolbe zooms in on conation—how people instinctively take action. Understanding your team’s individual problem-solving method in a specific, not generalized, manner is essential to avoiding disruptions of task conflict. Interpreting this data forms a performance guide to move the team toward productive inputs, including disagreement.

Harnessing Conative Diversity for Productive Task Conflict:

When team members understand why others approach tasks differently, they’re less likely to perceive those differences as personal flaws. Here’s how different Kolbe Action Modes™ might contribute to “good” conflict and how you can ensure success:

• Fact Finder vs. Quick Start: The Data Dive vs. The Gut Feeling
  • Potential Conflict: As in the previous examples, the insistent Fact Finder instinct demands data and analysis before acting, while the insistent Quick Start method favors innovation and exploration. This is a prime opportunity for task conflict – debating the best path forward.
  • Kolbe Solution (Promote “Good” Conflict): Frame the debate around evidence vs. possibility. The Fact Finder approach to problem-solving provides the data to support existing strategies, while the Quick Start problem-solving method presents potential alternatives. Instead of dismissing either approach, encourage them to build on one another. The Quick Start’s innovative ideas can be tested and refined by the Fact Finder’s data.
  • Connection to HBR: This aligns with HBR’s suggestion of encouraging team members to “disagree with the idea, not the person.” It’s about the approach’s merits, not the individual’s character.  However, you must validate the approach; an individual needs to solve problems in a certain way.  Guessing does not work here.
• Follow Thru vs. Implementor: Process vs. Practicality
  • Potential Conflict: The insistent Follow Thru needs to solve problems by adhering to established processes, while the insistent Implementor method prioritizes hands-on problem-solving and practical solutions. Disagreements can arise when the Implementor deviates from protocol to get the job done, frustrating the Follow Thru who values consistency.
  • Kolbe Solution (Promoting “Good” Conflict): Facilitate a discussion about efficiency vs. Quality control or compliance. The insistent Follow Thru explains why the process is important, while the insistent Implementor points out its practical limitations in specific situations. The goal is to identify opportunities to improve processes based on real-world experience.
  • Connection to HBR: This fosters a culture of “intellectual humility,” as HBR suggests. Both perspectives are valid and contribute to a better outcome.
• The “Yes, and…” Approach:
  • Encourage team members to build on one another’s ideas rather than shutting them down. This aligns with the HBR article’s focus on fostering a psychologically safe environment where individuals feel comfortable expressing dissenting opinions.
  • For example, instead of a leading Fact Finder saying, “That idea won’t work because we don’t have the data,” they could say, “That’s an interesting idea. Let’s see what data we can gather to support or refine it.”

Turning Task Conflict into Team Success:

1. Kolbe Assessment as Foundation: Start by understanding your team’s Kolbe profiles.
2. Facilitate Conative Awareness:  Help team members recognize and appreciate natural problem-solving strengths.
3. Frame Disagreements Constructively: Focus on the merits of the ideas, not the personalities involved.
4. Encourage “Yes, and…” Collaboration: Build on each other’s ideas and find solutions that leverage diverse perspectives.
5. Regularly Evaluate Processes: Use conflict as an opportunity to identify areas for improvement.

Understanding Task Conflict Conative Roots:

• By integrating Kolbe into change management, leaders can understand the conative roots of task conflict and create a team environment where healthy debate is not only tolerated but actively encouraged.  You will transform potential friction into fuel for innovation, problem-solving, and ultimately, business success.  These are the general principles outlined in the Harvard Business Review article.

Call to Action:

Are you ready to understand the power of your team’s strengths? It is important to have a Certified Kolbe Consultant guide the interpretation of this data to attract, engage, and develop your team so you can grow and exit on your terms.

Maria Forbes is a 12-year Certified Kolbe Consultant and Copper Circle Member. Please send an email to schedule a consultation with Maria

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

Citations: 1. Harvard Business Review article: “How to Encourage the Right Kind of Conflict on Your Team”