The Dangerous Sound of Silence

By Daniel Bobinski

Workplaces rarely implode overnight. Like small cracks in a dam that eventually lead to catastrophic failure, two tendencies in a workplace can create devastating fissures in an organization’s culture. The first is avoiding conflict. The second is ignoring feedback. Conflict is natural and feedback is vital, so these should not be ignored. And yet it happens. 

One can think of these as silent killers. I say that neglecting conflict or feedback can slowly erode a team’s trust, and if that goes on too long, the damage can be extremely difficult to repair.

THE FALSE PEACE OF CONFLICT AVOIDANCE

Picture two department heads having a passive-aggressive feud for months over resource allocation. Budgets are tight and some supplies are getting hard to come by. The two department heads hold high profile positions in the organization, so people have picked up on the tension. And, human beings being what they are, employees start taking sides. As a result, cooperation between the departments declines and morale starts deteriorating. Yet everyone attends meetings and pretends everything is fine. 

The impulse to avoid conflict is hardwired into many of us. Why? Because conflict can be uncomfortable and unpredictable. Fear is a powerful emotion. Especially fear of loss. And it just so happens that fear of loss is a common obstacle in conflict resolution. 

In reality, conflict isn’t the enemy. Unresolved conflict is. When people consistently avoid addressing issues, they may think they’re maintaining peace, but in reality, they’re allowing frustration to fester. Eventually, it becomes a painful, untreated infection.

Conflict avoidance often stems from a fundamental misunderstanding about what conflict actually represents. I believe Patrick Lencioni addresses this issue best in his book, “The Five Dysfunctions of a Team.” He defines conflict as open, unfiltered, and engaged debate about ideas and issues that matter to members of the team. When conflict emerges and needed debate does not occur, tensions rise. Lencioni tells us that tension is merely unspoken conflict. 

Lencioni also says healthy conflict isn’t about personal attacks or emotional outbursts, but rather it’s about addressing different perspectives and competing priorities or unmet expectations before they become toxic. When managers or leaders avoid such conversations, they’re essentially choosing temporary comfort over long-term team health.

By the way, the cost of avoiding conflict is staggering. Not only does trust dissipate, but when conflict goes unresolved, good employees become disengaged. In fact, they may just decide it’s not worth it and leave. That said, if they decide to stay, innovation often stagnates because fear of introducing additional conflict leads people to stop sharing ideas. 

GETTING TO RESOLUTION 

One way to prevent conflict from going unresolved involves implementing what some call the “72-hour rule.” With this rule, when leaders or supervisors become aware of conflict or tension, they should commit to addressing it within 72 hours. This doesn’t mean solving everything immediately, but it requires acknowledging the issue and beginning the conversation. Often, simply naming the elephant in the room reduces its power. Plus, it gets people thinking about solutions. 

Another technique involves using a “dispute resolution team.” This involves training select employees in dispute resolution, and when a conflict arises, a team member can be brought in as a neutral third party. Again, this puts the issue on the table instead of letting tensions grow. 

In both scenarios, the first priority is always getting the issue clearly identified. Without an agreed upon definition of the problem, it’s difficult to find solutions. 

THE INNOVATION GRAVEYARD OF IGNORED FEEDBACK

The second silent killer operates with similar stealth, and that’s people in management or leadership regularly ignoring employee feedback. Organizations in which suggestion boxes exist can be great – if suggestions get responses. But those boxes can quickly become a running joke if employee input is ignored. The message becomes “your input doesn’t matter.”

There doesn’t even need to be suggestion boxes. If any employee input is regularly cast aside, or worse yet, scoffed at, it doesn’t take long for morale to dip, with a similar downturn for motivation and innovation. 

What many in management and leadership often forget is that employees who are closest to the actual work often have the best ideas for improvement. They see inefficiencies, they identify bottlenecks, and perceive opportunities that leadership or management might miss. I’ve said for decades that when organizations ignore input coming from the front line, they are essentially throwing away free consulting services from their most invested stakeholders.

Again, human beings often act like human beings, and that includes protecting one’s ego. Some leaders unconsciously fear that implementing employee suggestions might reveal their limitations or diminish their authority. Others are simply overwhelmed and treat feedback as another item on an already overflowing plate. 

Here’s the secret: team members don’t expect leaders to implement every suggestion that’s made. But they do expect to be heard and receive thoughtful responses.

Therefore, establishing a “feedback loop protocol” can be valuable. When someone provides input, the protocol dictates the suggestion must be acknowledged within 24 hours, even if it’s just to say it’s being considered. Then, within a week, the person offering the idea should receive a detailed response explaining the decision. In other words, acknowledgement is made whether the suggestion is being implemented or set aside, or whether modifications will be needed for the suggestion to move forward. 

Bottom line, people offering suggestions need feedback. If none is given, even the best problem-solvers eventually stop trying to help. 

THE PATH FORWARD

Both conflict avoidance and feedback dismissal prioritize leader comfort over team effectiveness. Solutions for each problem require courage, meaning the courage to have difficult conversations and the humility to value input from others.

Leadership isn’t about having all the answers or maintaining artificial harmony. It includes creating environments in which problems get addressed and ideas get acknowledged. Conflict should be a tool for improvement and feedback should be a gift from and for the team. 

In other words, it pays to be proactive. Any organization’s future depends on the paths chosen by its leaders and managers.

Daniel Bobinski, who has a doctorate in theology, is a best-selling author and a popular speaker at conferences and retreats. For more than 30 years he’s been working with teams and individuals (1:1 coaching) to help them achieve excellence. He was also teaching Emotional Intelligence since before it was a thing. Reach him by email at DanielBobinski@protonmail.com or 208-649-6400.