From “Us and Them” to “We”: Leading Toward Healthy Group Dynamics
By David Dyck
B) Understanding Conflict Escalation and Change:
Group conflicts and the escalation pattern that takes us from “we” to “us and them” develops in a predictable four-stage pattern[1]:
i) Shared Problem-Solving (i.e. mutuality; goal is to solve the problem):
Most of us have been part of some group at some time where there is definitely some tension from time to time but not dysfunction, where there is honesty but also respect. Where communication and trust between members of a group are strong, they are able to continue to see themselves as part of one team, working together on a shared problem. The language of discussion and problem-solving focuses on the use of ‘we’ language and attacking the problem, not each other. People have differences, but the group is not always divided along the same lines.
ii) They Are the Problem (i.e. dislike; goal is to win):
When challenges prove somewhat resistant to the quick solution and/or once people start to become more emotionally charged, the next stage often emerges; here, each side often begins to see the other side as the problem. Personal dislikes and a sense of “opposing teams” within the larger group/structure first begin to surface. The fundamental goal shifts from getting needs met and resolving the issues to winning.
During this stage of conflict parties often first begin to use positional or vilifying language that focuses more exclusively on their differences and/or on the other as problem rather than partner. They also begin to lose sight of their shared interests and, in a nascent form, even their shared humanity. Other signs that the conflict has moved to this second stage include issue proliferation and an increased tendency to talk about rather than with each other, or to use increasingly indirect forms of communication with the other side. In group conflict, the previously shifting alliances are now beginning to harden into set camps.
iii) Antagonism (i.e. hatred; goal is to hurt):
As each side begins to tell themselves stories about how the other side is the problem, they also begin to treat the other side as the problem. Personal dislike begins to morph towards something closer to hatred. The fundamental goal now shifts from winning to hurting one’s opponents. Actions that indicate that the conflict has progressed to this stage may include:
- Parties having increased trouble looking at one another directly
- Rolling eyes, sarcasm, and other evidence of disdain and disgust
- Shutting down or powering up (i.e. emotional flooding; no “wedge of awareness”)
- Raised voices and/or the silent treatment after meetings
- Walking or storming out of meetings or conversations
Statements may sound like this:
- “Whatever…” or “Nice…” (i.e. passive-aggressive/sarcasm)
- “How can you guys be so blind to what’s really going on here?!”
- “I can’t believe what a &%$* he is!”
- “If she doesn’t like it, there are other places she could work.”
- “I know they just want to see me gone. They wanna see my head roll…”
iv) Change in the Social Structure (i.e. demonization; goal is to destroy):
If the group fails to successfully address their conflict in any of the previous three phases, the conflict will inevitably lead to a change in the social structure that is reflective of decreased connection (i.e. same team) and increased polarization (i.e. opposing teams). Such social change includes things like:
- Inability to talk with each other about work in any meaningful/authentic way
- The loss of ability to interact with ease at the social or informal level
- Lack of authentic engagement or motivation with work tasks
- Failure to produce effective results
- Ongoing high degrees of tension and distrust between workers and management, between differing layers of management, and/or between work units
- Cliques (same groups sit together at every lunch hour, studiously avoid others)
- High sick time and turnover
- Acts of deliberate sabotage
- Grievances
- Terminations
As the conflict escalates through these four levels, trust and empathy dry up, communication deteriorates or is cut-off, extreme voices rise to the top within each “team” and dominate discussion often demanding absolute loyalty (“you’re either with us against us!”), while both sides’ capacity and desire to solve the conflict constructively diminishes. At the same time as trust, communication, and goodwill decrease the stress, anxiety and the chance of violence increases. The goal now often shifts from the desire to hurt the other (see stage iii) to that of destroying the other.
[1] The four-stage model in this article was adapted by David Dyck from a seven-stage model created by John Paul Lederach.