Don'T Talk About "Personality" In Workplace Conflict!

"Cognitive laziness" is a concept proposed by social psychologists Susan Fiske and Shelley Taylor, which describes a tendency to preserve cognitive resources and focus only on important matters. They believe that human beings will instinctively choose time-saving and labor-saving ways to reduce cognitive burden in the cognitive process because of limited mental resources. Because our cognitive capacity is extremely limited, if something takes a lot of effort and time, the mental ability that can be called will be further reduced.

In the process of human evolution, it is the essence of survival to quickly identify friends and enemies. In order to survive, people have to quickly judge the character and intentions of others or other tribes. "To people" is simpler and faster than "to things"; Focusing on people without analyzing the complex personality as a whole and only looking at some characteristics is another easy shortcut.

Judging according to stereotypes is such a shortcut to preserve cognitive resources. The conclusions drawn in this way may not be accurate, unfair or even harmful, but they can indeed quickly explain human behavior. Few people openly talk about others based on the stereotype of race, nationality or gender. However, many people are keen to apply some methods such as Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), Enneagram and Color Code Such personality type tests are used to summarize other people's behaviors, for example, "she is really an INTJ (introverted intuition thinking judgment) person" and "he is a typical No. 8 challenger type". [3]

In fact, MBTI、 The "reliability and effectiveness" of a series of personality tests, such as Type 9 personality, DISC Assessment, Herrmann Brain Dominance Instrument and Thomas Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument, has been controversial in the field of psychology.

However, according to the Association of Test Publishers, Society for Human Resources, and MBTI publishers, these tests are now widely used to select talents, train executives, build teams, and resolve conflicts, with an annual use of up to one million. The Culture Of Personality is insightful. Annie Murphy Paul, the author, points out in the book that this personality classification is like a constellation. At best, it can only capture a small part of the differences in people's behavior, and in general, it cannot explain the dynamic conflicts in the workplace in depth and concretely. However, these tests are often used as a basis for resolving workplace conflicts. For example, some people will say that ENTP (extroversion intuition thinking understanding) and ISTJ (introversion feeling thinking judgment) do not work together. In fact, this statement is the same as "Capricorn and Sagittarius do not work together", and each of us may not work together.

The real causes of workplace conflicts are subtle and complex, and it is inevitable to touch sensitive issues in organizational politics. It is difficult to sum up, so it is difficult to find a widely applicable solution. Perhaps there is a conflict of interest, or the role orientation and management level are not clear enough, or competition is more attractive than cooperation, or the open regulatory mechanism regulating words and deeds is lacking.

The two employees in conflict invented a safe and safe explanation, such as "my colleague is the kind of person who tangles with details" and "my colleague doesn't care about changing the wrong place at all", so that they don't have to raise objections to the company or offend others. For them, instead of going to the boss to ask for a change of partner, or asking the Human Resources Department to develop a more effective cooperation incentive mechanism, it is easier to imagine that "if you can understand the character (or character model) of the other party, you can cooperate better". In addition, there is another possibility: the cause of the conflict may be that a member of the team is lazy. In this case, it is far from the point to talk about character. Some people even use the statement of personality model to gloss over the mistakes, giving the excuse that "I am improvisational, so I can't finish the work according to the specified deadline". Either improvisation or other types, if you don't want to dispute with colleagues or customers, you have to finish the work on time with quality and quantity guaranteed.

Attributing workplace conflicts to irrelevant personality reasons may be just fun and irrelevant in the short term, but in the long run, this practice conceals the real causes of conflicts, and conflicts will not be resolved, which will inevitably lead to crisis.

So, how to properly deal with workplace conflicts?

First of all, observe the situation dynamics that cause conflict and exacerbate conflict. The whole situation may be very complex, which requires multiple considerations. Think about whether the solution to conflict needs the help of other people or other teams in the company. For example, if the problem is improper role positioning, the boss should come forward to clarify responsibility Subject; If the reward of the incentive mechanism is more personal than team, we can ask the Human Resources Department to help set organizational goals and adjust the incentive mechanism.

Then consider what risks the two parties may take if there are some changes in the current system, responsibilities, processes, incentive mechanism and management departments at all levels. For this reason, we should first jump out of the limitation of personal perspective and regard the contradiction as the result of different responsibilities of the two roles conflict Analyze, not as a problem between two people. For example, if I am a businessman and you are responsible for risk management, our respective starting points and priorities are quite different. Let's discuss how to grasp the shifting factors and indicators of interest and security, risk and return, in order to achieve the best results. Don't put your data driven conservative decision-making style in the first place, and fight against my intuitive risk-taking style.

Finally, if someone feels that conflict resolution must refer to the personality test results, please refer to the verified and non categorical personality tests, such as Hogan Personality Inventory and IPIP-NEO Assessment of the "Big Five" personality dimensions. See this for free tests http://www.personal.psu.edu/ ~j5j/IPIP/ipipneo120.htm )。 These two sets of tests have been fully peer reviewed, and their effectiveness and reliability are supported by sufficient psychological basis, which can better explain the differences in people's behavior. They are not classified like MBTI, so they can better explain the crux of the contradiction. Moreover, the results provided by the Hogan Personality Questionnaire and the five personality traits test are not MBTI's style of "Hello, I'm Hello, Everybody is Hello". For those who have the courage to accept these tests, the results they give almost invariably point out the pain points, the problems in personal development, such as your arbitrariness, irritability, It is easy to regard other people's criticism as personal attack on yourself. Such feedback is often difficult to accept, but only in this way can help two or more people involved in the conflict establish self-awareness and mutual understanding.

My one colleague It is often said that "treatment without diagnosis is purely random." Even if diagnosis is made before treatment, if the diagnosis is improper, there will be no good effect. To resolve the conflict, first find out the problem, then analyze it, and clarify the cause and effect. "Personality theory" can not really solve the problem.