Conflict in Student Organization
The African Student Organization on campus have six executive board members with different positions and responsibilities. The Exec members includes the president, vice-president, treasurer, secretary, publicist secretary, and social chair. We all agreed to work together to complete task as we all had the same goal of improving the organization by creating more events that interests our members. However, this wasn't the case as one of the exec member was not conforming to the group. This behavior ended up causing conflict especially because we did not address it early on as we identified the problem.
Everyone in the group was not pleased with this attitude because it felt like she just wasn't contributing to the team. Surprisingly, she was fond of posting her pictures and updating her status on social media. This made us angry as we remember how zealous and interested she was when running for the position. I remember her asking people to vote for her because of how excellent she would be at the position because of her strong social media usage. So, this made us furious when she was not publicizing the events or posting pictures of events for members to see. In reference to Parker's informal model, he says that groups do better when tasks roles align with characteristics of individuals. The role aligned with her character, but she just wasn't doing her work.
Her lack of commitment first became apparent to the group members during our first event of the semester. We all decided not to say anything, but this caused tension among the group because no one was pointing fingers at her for not doing her work. Often times, group members and I would "throw shades" at her without directly calling her out. For example, one time I said that "board members need to do their work instead of just taking the glory after a successful outcome". I did this after one of our Roundtable Event. I had to organize and publicize the event myself as she did not assist in any of the planning. Other board members were in charge of getting equipment ready, contacting speakers and setting the room for the event. We had a great turn out of guests, and they gave good remarks about the event. She stood there, smiled and accepted the glory of an event that she did not contribute to.
This behavior became the norm, so our president, Tom decided to speak to her privately. He spoke to her about how she hasn't been contributing to the group, but this only made her angry. She accused Tom of being authoritative and speaking to her in a rude manner. He narrated to us that she hung up the phone while he was still talking to her. So, he scheduled a meeting where everyone was present including Abigail. She accused him of being dominating because he was the only male in the group, as well as the president. She also said that he did not respect her when talking to her or asking her to complete her task. He responded to her by telling her to lower her voice while talking to him. This made her angrier, and she told him not to tell her what to do. Another Exec member and I told her to be calm, but instead she took her bag and walked out of the meeting. Later that day, she sent a long message that she was stepping down from her position because she no longer wanted to be part of the team. She also said that she was disappointed that nobody intervened during the argument.
Reflecting back on the conflict, I felt like we should have said something to her at the beginning when we noticed that she was slacking. We should have also asked the vice-president to step in and talk to her since she might have been more likely to listen. The fact that we waited for a long period before Tom confronted her made it worse. At that point, she probably felt like we were all against her. We should have also intervened during the argument as it felt more like a personal conflict instead of her addressing why she was not performing her duties. Tom was more concerned about her not doing her job, but she said that she was not performing her duties because she felt that he was controlling. Apparently, they have both been on an Exec board in the past, and Tom said that she was known for trying to push her incompetency on others. Now that I think about it, perhaps her lack of commitment might have been a result of an ordeal they had in the past. I don't think Tom was being controlling, neither did other Exec member think so. In fact, we eventually elected someone else as the publicity secretary, and our organization has been running smoothly since then. We have had a few conflict, but they have been healthy conflict where constructive criticism is involved and everyone feel like a big part of the team.
One point I'd make - face to face conversations of the sort Tom had with Abigail are necessary. The phone is not a good way to do this. Further, being defensive about things is a natural first reaction so the conversation needs to persist beyond that. Hanging up the phone is a relatively easy thing to do. Walking out on a face to face meeting is harder. I've had such conversations in the past. And at first you don't know whether they are going to work or not. But you have to keep trying till you think the message is getting through.
ReplyDeleteNow, as far as your story is concerned, Abigail's motivation remains a mystery. Why not just quit the group rather than go through that? The only thing that occurs to me to explain this is that membership in the group was a credential for her. She wanted to the credential, but she didn't want the responsibility that goes with it. I don't know if that is true or not, but if it is then there is some parallel with our class, where some students seem not to come to class anymore. They still want credit for course.
The male-female dimension of conflict is probably something I won't talk about in class on Tuesday, because it is outside what B&D have to say and I'm not sure that including it can help our discussion, but it surely does matter, especially in light of current events. There have been some who argue now that certain students are too strident about not accepting a point of view that is different from their own. Students in the humanities are particularly taken to task in this regard. You would think that major shouldn't matter for this, but I'm curious about what Abigail's major is and likewise for Tom. It might point to a different undercurrent to explain what happened.
I agree that one of the main thing to consider with conflict is whether or not the message is getting through. It would be time-consuming and even frustrating to have a discussion with someone and still not resolve the issue at hand. I believe that's when people apply different defense mechanism . I might have mentioned in one of my previous post, but earlier this semester I attended a conference where the speaker addressed conflict in the workplace. He gave tips on managing conflict and one of it is listening when the other person is talking. Often times, people in arguments tend to increase their voice when making their point clear because they feel that they are not being heard. A way to avoid conflict is giving one heads up before approaching him/her. That is, having an informed consent prior to having a conversation or accusing them. My favorite tip which sometimes can be hard to follow, but I feel it is quite effective is having someone we both trust listen in on the conversation and act as a witness.
ReplyDeleteAbigail's motivation remains a mystery to me too. One can only speculate, but like you said the group might have been a form of credential to her. Perhaps, she thought she would be able to get away with not doing things. This is partly common in some organizations on campus where people act enthusiastic in the beginning only to get their desired position. Often times these leadership positions are ways for people to brag on their resumes. I would also agree with you that this happens for courses too especially the ones that do not require attendance. I wonder if this is a form of opportunism.
Your point about student in humanities fields not being accepting to other people's point of view is interesting. Philosophy students are quite difficult to convince as they already have a strong set of belief. I am actually quite intrigued about this topic, and I should read more on it. Contrarily, Abigail and Tom are both in the stem field. Abigail is studying Biochem, and Tom is studying Engineering. I wonder how their major might explain some of their actions. I am actually curious to find out.
I don't know Abigail personally therefore I can only speculate on the reasons for her behavior... I do think that things escalated and even though is hard to know the moment to intervene, I believe that when Tom talked to her it was already "too late". I am curious to know a little more about the structure of the organization.
ReplyDeleteDid you guys meet on a weekly basis? Was it face-to-face meeting? Those are factors that could influence her behavior. If she was indeed in the club just for the credentials, developing a relationship with the group members makes it harder to lie/ act opportunistically to their faces.
Another way that MAYBE this conflict could have been solved was to create a “to do” list after each meeting, and include a deadline. If she did not complete her tasks on the deadline, someone else could message her and be like “Hey, can you create that event by 9pm and send the link on the group?”. Again, I don’t know if that was already being done and she still just did not do anything about it…
Last point is regarding the last meeting in which she stormed out. Maybe she felt like everyone was against her and she could not count/honestly take the feedback. Maybe it felt like an intervention/trap and walking out was her defense mechanism… I wonder if maybe you reached out to her to grab some coffee after she could have shared her motives with you….
Okay so I definitely wrote a comment on this post, but I was just looking back to make sure I did all my comments and I don't seem to see that here. That's kind of annoying because I remember writing quite a bit. Oh well, I'll try again.
ReplyDeleteIn one of my previous blog posts, I wrote about a similar situation where when I was President of Illini Women in Economics, one of the exec members wasn't doing her job properly as she should. We also both work together on Women in Economics so we've both been in situations where a board member is slacking off on her duties and it is really frustrating because all of us work together as a team, so when one falters, other people have to pick up the slack and it's more than what they signed up for. As executive board members, all of our duties work interdependently and it is important that everyone is on their task. If there is a situation where for some reason, one can't perform their work, it is important that he or she let the rest of the team know right away to explain what is going on, and so that the rest of the team can work to figure out a solution. These type of situations are unusual circumstances like an emergency, family matter, tough exams or assignments, etc. When we're in an RSO, we all understand that everything we're doing is voluntary and that school does come first, so in that situation, if a person has an upcoming deadline or exam, it's okay to ask others for help because being on a board together means that everyone is a team, as long as that person gives prompt notice in advance as is her responsibility.
That being said, I've also been in situations where I'm on a team and I feel left out. I don't know Abigail so I don't know how her perspective was with all of this, but it is also important that everyone in a group or a team is seen and treated as an equal and no one feels like an outsider. This relates to the Akerlof and Kranton essay we read where there are insiders and outsiders, and their status as one or the other affects how they perform their duties. I wasn't there in the case of Abigail so I don't know how she felt and can't speak for it, but it is the president's responsibility to make sure that everyone in the team feels included and respected from the start. I do commend Tom for trying to handle the situation privately though, and I wouldn't have expected Abigail to react that way. If it was the case where Abigail felt left out from the get-go, I could see why she might not be as inclined to perform her duties.
Lastly, it may also be the case that Abigail accepted the role simply to put a line on her resume. We've both been in the situation of an exec board member not doing any work but getting all the glory that comes with the title and that annoys me, especially when I'm actually passionate about the work that we're doing. When I was president and interviewing for this year's board, I made an effort to make sure that the new people I chose were committed to getting the work done. I asked questions about what ideas they had and how they would make sure that Women in Economics would continue after we all graduate. The one mistake that I made was not doing that for the people who were already on board and were switching roles, because I extended the courtesy of trusting that they would make an effort since they were already on the board.