Organizations

At Vistelar, we primarily provide our conflict management training to “contact professionals” — individuals who interact directly with the general public or an organization’s clients. Examples include: cops, nurses, teachers, customer service representatives, hospitality workers, and security professionals.

Beyond these obvious professions, every month or so we hear about a “contact professional” we’ve never thought of before. For example, recently a large city government contacted us about training their parking checkers.

Yep, parking checkers — who would have thought? Well, it turns out, we should have. Parking checkers operate by themselves, at all hours, and in every neighborhood — and they give out citations to individuals from all walks of life and in all states of mind.

Vistelar provided a day of training for every parking checker in the city and, boy, did we have our eyes opened about the nature of this job.

It’s no surprise they are subject to pretty constant verbal abuse. But we were shocked to learn they regularly have things thrown at them and are sometimes physically assaulted. We even heard stories of being threatened by guns. The reality is that parking checkers may have the highest risk of violence for the lowest pay of any job in America.

A different audience for our conflict management training

In recent years, we’ve been asked to provide our training to organizational teams.

This wasn’t unexpected due to our experience with a question we often ask during presentations to large groups. We ask the audience to vote on their greatest source of conflict from these three options:

1. Conflict between themselves and customers (citizens, clients, patients, students, the public, etc.)
2. Conflict among employees
3. Conflict between employees and supervisors

The people we are speaking to are primarily contact professionals who face a lot of conflict in their jobs. However, despite this, they — without fail — rank #2 (conflict among employees) as their greatest source of conflict and #3 (conflict between employees and supervisors) as their second greatest source. Conflict with customers is always last.

For example, a couple of years ago I gave a presentation to about 500 tax collectors who regularly put liens on people’s assets. Even they said that conflict among employees was their #1 source of conflict. Again, who would have thought?

Over the years, we had certainly heard from our contact professional clients that our training had a positive impact within their organizations — so we decided to take on some of these new clients.

A surprising thing we learned

Generally, the contact professionals we deal with aren’t shy about addressing conflict head-on. For example, a cop wouldn’t have become a cop if he or she was scared of conflict. To a lesser extent, but still true, nurses, teachers, and customer service workers wouldn’t have picked their jobs if they couldn’t deal with conflict.

Once we learned more about the inner workings of organizations, we discovered something that was quite surprising — at least to us. A lot of people within organizations really struggle with conflict and, as a result, they try to avoid it at all costs or accommodate people by giving in just to appease them.

We’ve talked to a lot of bosses who come to us saying they have problems with conflict but, when we dig deeper, we find the real problem is with people shying away from it.

When people avoid conflict or accommodate people rather than dealing with conflict directly, bad things can happen.

• Conflicts don’t get resolved 
• Resentment builds
• Self-esteem is impacted
• Inappropriate behavior gets positively reinforced
• Conflict escalates to emotional or physical violence

After 30 years of teaching people how to deal with conflict, we already understood the outcome of poorly managed conflict is pretty awful (e.g., customer complaints, liability, destroyed reputations, injuries). What we didn’t realize is that the outcome of completely avoiding conflict or of accommodating others to avoid having to deal with it is almost as bad.

“In surveys of European and American executives, fully 85% of them acknowledge they have issues or concerns at work that they were afraid to raise. Afraid of the conflict that would provoke, afraid to get embroiled in arguments they did not know how to manage and they were bound to lose.”

Margaret Heffernan, TED Talk: Dare To Disagree (1955 – present)

The other thing we discovered when we got inside of organizations is that there is a difference between individual conflict and team conflict.

Most of our contact professionals primarily deal with individual conflict. These individuals generally interact with just one person in their daily work (teachers, corrections officers, and mental health professionals are the exception).

Within organizations, there is obviously a lot of this type of conflict. For example, a boss counseling, reprimanding or firing an employee, an employee arguing with a member of their project team, or one member of a team dealing with harassment by another team member.

In these individual conflict situations, our conflict management tactics work great — as long as enough attention is placed on a tactic we call Closure.

A unique component of our conflict management training

In our conflict management training programs, we teach personal safety awareness, how to prevent conflict, de-escalation, and crisis management. However, unique in the training industry, we also teach a tactic we call Closure. The goals of this tactic are to:

• Achieve the best possible outcome
• End the interaction in a better place than where it started
• Establish a positive foundation for all future interactions

Closure is the 6th “C” of our conflict management framework, which we define as “follow-through considerations, such as ensuring the situation is stabilized, summarizing decisions, and reviewing the interaction.”

We have a wide range of elements associated with this tactic that align with our core principal of conflict management: treat people with dignity by showing them respect.

For a contact professional, Closure is extremely important because — for most of our clients — the people whom they’re with dealing today will likely return to their organization and they will need to deal with them in the future.

Within an organization, the Closure tactic is even more important — you might need to deal with the person with whom you’ve had conflict for the rest of your career.

In our experience, many contact professionals short-change the Closure step and, often, they get away with it. However, that’s not a risk you want to take within an organizational environment.

So, again, our conflict management tactics work well when applied to individual conflict within an organization — as long as our Closure tactic is applied to every interaction.

Organizations deal with both individual conflict AND team conflict

As described above, organizations deal with a lot of individual conflict but they also have a lot of team conflict. Examples include the boss announcing a decrease in benefits to his or her entire team, a meeting where angers flare, almost any organizational change, and — of course — corporate politics.

Even individual conflict within organizations becomes team conflict because many people end up getting involved (e.g., the boss, HR, a co-worker).

Some of this team conflict is short-lived (e.g., a “passionate” meeting) but other forms of team conflict extend over long periods of time (e.g., lingering anger and resentment about a situation which can last for decades).

This distinction between individual conflict and team conflict was something we recognized at Vistelar but didn’t understand with much clarity. It wasn’t until I had a meeting with a very insightful guy — Dr. Jim Bohn (The Blue Collar Scholar – http://www.drjimbohn.com) — that the cloud was lifted.

Prior to starting his consulting and speaking business, Dr. Bohn spent over 35 years at Johnson Controls and was the senior staff member brought in to help manage change — either within the organization or within a company with which Johnson Controls had a service contract.

Dr. Bohn studied Vistelar’s courseware designed for contact professionals and made several observations:

• Conflict management training is desperately needed in organizations (for all of the reasons I’ve pointed out in previous articles)
• Conflict between supervisors and employees is rarely addressed by organizations
• Unlike conflict on the street with police or contact professionals, organizational conflict builds over time – it is not episodic
• A large percentage of conflict within organizations is team conflict, not individual conflict

He suggested that, if we wanted to enhance our organizational training programs, we needed to focus more on team conflict without compromising our training on how to deal with individual conflict.

The good news is that we are already somewhat down this path. One of our certified trainers — Jill Weisensel — has been studying how teams deal with conflict at a large university for several years. Her focus has been in developing a broad-based bystander intervention program for dealing with a wide variety of issues, including sexual assault, sexual harassment, discrimination, and hazing.

This program has gotten a lot of attention within the International Association of Campus Law Enforcement Administrators (IACLEA) and, more recently, she and a university colleague have adapted this program for use within a large multinational corporation.

Jill’s program uses all of the tactics Vistelar teaches to contact professionals but, through her work at the university and corporate level, she has modified our curriculum to work with team conflict, as well as individual conflict.

While we’ll continue to provide our conflict management training to organizations to help them deal with internal conflict, with Jill’s assistance, we plan to have a program focused primarily on team conflict soon.

As they say, watch this space.

Hello there.

Gary Klugiewicz here.

Vistelar introduced a number of significant changes to our courseware at the recent Beyond Conflict Conference held in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.  At last week’s Rockville Centre, NY Police Department Verbal Defense & Influence Instructor Class, Dave Young and I first presented this material.  We introduced the new manuals, workbooks, and PowerPoints.   The material was very well received.

Watch the video below that explains how we now review incidents using the Point-of-Impact 6 C’s of Conflict Management.  This new incident review concept included Context, Contact, Conflict, Crisis, Combat, and Closure to describe how conflict can be prevented and/or managed.  This video also describes how the revised Communication under Pressure Card helps contact professional to manage these conflicts.   Please comment below on your thoughts on my explanation of these changes.

Let’s keep everyone safe.
[cxl url=https://www.cxl1.net/bNfQ6wJV2cW width=480 height=270 skin=black]

Hello.

This is Gary Klugiewicz.

Vistelar has introduced the 6 C’s of Conflict Management that examines how conflict develops and what we can do to recognize it, prevent it, manage it, and resolve it.

The 6 C’s in include Context, Contact, Conflict, Crisis, Combat, and Closure.

Dave Young and I have been focusing on the Closure Component of the 6 C’s of Conflict Management in order to minimize the changes of conflict escalating to crisis and combat due to the need to physically control an out of control person or prevent a physical assault.   We have discussed exit strategies in the past, i.e. how to verbally or physically exit a situation where “communication is breaking down and personal safety might be compromised.”  Jeff Mehring, a security consultant and Vistelar advisor, expands on this concept and takes it to another level.   I think you will enjoy his article posted below.   Everyone needs to spend some time developing their EXIT LANGUAGE so they safety disengage before verbal conflict escalates to a crisis or combat situation.

Please post you comments below.

“EXIT LANGUAGE”

By

Jeff Mehring

Security Consultant and Analyst

Security Assessments and Analytics LLC

Milwaukee, Wisconsin

All of us at one time or another have been involved in conflict management situations in which words alone fail, creating the need for us to leave the situation.  The difficulty at the point the decision is made to leave, is how to accomplish the exit?

It is great to be able to tell someone, “just leave”, but how one goes about doing this can escalate a situation, or it may set up the next person, who needs to assume the interaction, to fail before he/she even arrives on the scene. Some examples:

• If you leave an interaction with someone without an explanation as to why you are leaving, or providing some kind of next step information, the person you are interacting with will become more agitated, because you have just given the impression you are “blowing them off.” Then again, if your explanation sounds something like this, “You are rude and I don’t need to put up with this kind of behavior!” and then you leave, you may have just pushed the individual off an emotional cliff, with escalated behavior to follow.

• There is also the exit language which sets up the next person to fail. That sounds like this, “I’m calling security.”  Now think for a moment, when someone from the general public is informed security is on the way, what is the expectation of what is about to happen?  Most individuals equipped with the knowledge that security is coming prepare themselves for World War III, after all most individuals assume security comes to either kick someone out or hold them for the police, thus setting the stage for aggression before the fact.

Exit language needs to be tailored to the situation one is trying to leave.  It must convey to the other individual that you have listened to what is being said, it must acknowledge that you need assistance in some form or another to help the individual with the concerns that have been voiced, and it must be open ended enough so as to not limit your response options, or set the next person up to fail before he/she even has a chance to say a word.  The language should advise the individual that you are going to continue to work to address the concerns which have been voiced, but at the same time inform the individual that, for whatever reason, you aren’t the person who can resolve the issue(s).  Some examples of “exit language”:

• I don’t seem to be able to help you with your concerns, but I will contact someone who can and get right back with you.
• You have concerns I don’t seem to be able to help you with, but I think I know someone who can help. I’m going to step out and make a call and get back with you.
• Your concerns deserve greater attention than I can give them, but I think I know who to call to help you.
• Your concerns are important to me, as a next step let me talk to my supervisor to see what can be done.

It is important not to identify who you will be calling, as some contact options represent a step of escalation, or are even seen as a threat.  Once you have made your exit, contact the person or people best suited to advance the conflict management process to a peaceful resolution.  Who you contact can vary greatly depending upon the concerns and needs.

It is equally important that you don’t set up the individual you are dealing with to “lose face” or suffer embarrassment through the response option you select.  For instance, if you need to involve security, be prepared to explain to the individual why security is the most appropriate party to address the concern(s), or at the very least prepare security to provide that explanation if reentering the scene is not safe or prudent for you.

Additionally, stay away from words such as “problem” or “issue” in your exit language, i.e. “I can tell you have problems.” Or “You have lots of issues.”  These are trigger words. You might just as well tell the individual “You are the problem” or “You are the issue.”  The word “concern” works very nicely in these situations as it conveys that you have picked up on the person’s distress and want to help elevate the causes.

There is a second set of exit language which also must be considered.  This is language that is used by someone else to extricate us from a confrontational situation, or in a situation where it is immediately realized that the potential for harm is more than you can handle and you need to “get out” gracefully and warn others in the area.

In the former, I recommend language which would appear to be common in the workplace, but is actually “code language” for leave the situation.  For instance, in a hospital setting the code may be “MRI 99” and could be employed by saying, “The doctor needs to see you in MRI 99, let me see if I can help this person.”  Then transition and leave the situation.

In the latter, one may have a situation in an office setting where a customer comes through the door angry and intimidating and approaches a receptionist and states in a demanding voice, “I want to see someone right now about this letter I received!”  The receptionist responds, “I have to step down the hall to get that person’s attention.  I also have a printer alert which I just received, so as I go down the hall I need to let the office staff know about the alert, which takes me in the same direction.  I’ll be right back.”  Then leave the desk and start letting individuals know there is a “printer alert” which is the code language to begin a preplanned practiced response in such situations.

Whether you are the person responding to try and resolve the conflict, or the conflict comes to you, you need to take time to think about the exit language that will best suit you and your workplace.  Usually two or three practiced statements will allow you to exit safely, maintain the emotional safety of the person you are interacting with, and keep everyone physically safe.

Hello,

This is Gary Klugiewicz from Vistelar.

I would like to share an e-mail that Charles Bell sent to us. Charles is a private security contact professional who attended one of our recent VDI Instructor Classes. He wanted to share one of his positive real life experiences with us. See the e-mail that he sent me posted below. What is interesting about his experience is not so much that he made a good impression on someone he didn’t know was an important person but that he reminded that person of an important lesson. This lesson was that no matter who you are that the Universal Greeting with 1. an appropriate greeting, 2. a professional introduction including your name and affiliation, 3. an explanation of why you are there, and 4. an appropriate question that opens the door to a pleasant, professional, meaningful contact.

Thank you Charles for sharing this important lesson with us.
______________________________

Good afternoon Gary,

This is Charles from the Shelby County class. Just wanted to pass along an experience I had at work earlier today. I was assisting customers and people parking in a busy part of the building and outside in the parking area. One gentleman parked, exited his car, and walked towards me. I immediately went into the Universal Greeting, using the Five Maxims (Four Appeals). He then informed me he was the property manager in charge of this particular site and gave me his business card. He seemed impressed with how I treated him, even though I had no idea who he was at the time. He even mumbled “I should’ve told you ‘who’ I was”, as we were walking, talking, and he was passing on valuable information about the site.

He was a very nice gentleman and I’m thinking it left a good image for my company, as he noticed my command presence and professionalism. And, as a major decision maker and influencer in our company’s relationship, he was assured that this is how I was treating everyone. (dignity and respect), just as I had been doing all week. I have been using these tactics in some form or another since the early 90’s in law enforcement, but this class really helped me solidify the techniques by reinforcing the concepts through practicing, and having that powerful pre-planned response.

Thanks sir for all you do!

Charles
____________________________

Please consider sharing your written, audio, and video stores along with your photos with us at our blog

Just follow this link to http://www.vistelar.com/floodgate with a password of “vistelar” and submit your material.

Please add an e-mail or phone number so that I can contact you with any questions.

Active shooter attacks can be over as fast as they start. Learning how to make tactical decisions under stress and be calm under chaos is something you train for not just read about.

[cxl url=https://www.cxl1.net/9xXN9TVnpnn width=480 height=270 skin=black]

It was nice to receive confirmation from the teachers around the state of Missouri on how this training prepared them for real world attacks as compared to the other training they attended and watched on PowerPoints and the videos they reviewed.

Understanding how to move in small groups under fire, respond correctly with emergency treatment for gun shot wounds, how to break windows and exit buildings, negotiate hallways and control yourself and your students when lives are on the line.

Training is much more effective when you conduct fire drills rather than fire talks.

I just completed our active-shooter training for teachers and staff members of the high school, middle school, and elementary school in Grandview, Missouri.

All 80 plus teachers and staff complete our online training program and then attended a 3 1/2 hour block of hands-on activities, drills and exercises to educate, inspire and better prepare them for managing the safety of students during an active shooter attack.

We taught them how to manage the 6 C’s of conflict management in the classroom to how not only to improve their safety but enhance communication between teachers, staff, students, and their families.

Everyone did a great job and are now better prepared to respond to an active-shooter event.

Hello.

This is Gary Klugiewicz.

Dave Young and I just completed a Verbal Defense & Influence Instructor Class for the Park Rangers from the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE).  These thirty-two (32) instructors came from throughout the United States and represented the decision to create an agency wide communication training program for their organization.   The USACE have been conducting conflict resolution training since 1998.   I have had the pleasure of previously training several of their instructors.   Bill Jackson,  supervisory ranger, was our host for the class held at the Ouachita Project Management Office located in Royal, Arkansas.

Watch the I Phone Video that Dave Young created the shows highlights from the class.

[cxl url=https://www.cxl1.net/bMSMrX9LvBP width=480 height=270 skin=black]

We had a great time training these highly experienced contact professionals.    Their experience and previous training made this class both easy to teach and beneficial  for both them and us.   The instructors especially like the fact that we conducted fire drills instead of just doing fire talks – we created conflict prevention and management scripts that we practiced to improve skills.  The instructors also like the way that the class is now designed to be taught in its entirety or in modules depending on time available for training.

We also launched the our new Situations Training Drill Activities at this class that analyzed Real World Conflicts in order to answer the importance questions of What to Do?  In this activity, students review real incidents that could have gone better in order to “brainstorm” alternate and, hopefully, more positive outcomes.  While this activity can be performed breaking the class into pairs, it can also be done as a small group and/or full class event.   By analyzing real world events that happened to persons in the class,  the entire class is able to make the “translation” from general conflict situations to agency specific applications.  In debriefing the activity in this class, the instructors commented on the importance of this training in teaching their personnel how to review an incident in order to debrief it in order to improve future performance.  This shared review allowed for a “group think” that enable the entire class to focus on potential solutions.  This sharing allowed the entire class to add additional tools to their conflict prevention and management tool belts.   We use the analogy of adding additional arrows to your quiver.  Everyone felt that they left well armed.

We at Vistelar look forward to the enhancing our relationship with the USACE Park Rangers.    This partnership will be a collaborative effort with all parties involved benefiting from our continued relationship.  Dave and I would like to thank all the instructors who attended for their professionalism and contributions to the success of this class.

Hi There,

Gary Klugiewicz here with another Radio Health Journal audiotape that provides great suggestions for staying positive in what is oftentimes a very negative focused world.

This message shows us how to overcome our focus on negative events by learning how to hardwire happiness.

16-22 Segment 2: Hardwiring Happiness

In Verbal Defense & Influence we spend a great deal of time in our peace stories that stress positive outcomes.

We need to learn how to take the positive events in our life and focus on them.

Please let us know what you think about his lesson in the comment section below.