Chapter four of Adam Grant's "Think Again" delves into the value of constructive conflict in the workplace. We talk about the differences of "personal conflict" and "task conflict," and we show how encouraging healthy disagreement can improve your team's ability to solve problems and make smarter choices.

We discuss the importance of leaders engaging in task conflict and creating a brave space for team members to work through differences without taking it personally, and discuss the importance of having a challenge network: a group of people who can help point out personal and professional blind spots.

We also talk about how people-pleasing can be a career-limiting trait, as well as the importance of being authentic and forthcoming about one's own merits and detriments. Moreover, we discuss the significance of a good cultural fit in the workplace, as well as the difficulties of working with team members who aren't a good fit for the organization.

Listen in to find out how to create a work environment that respects individuality and encourages development by encouraging healthy debate and establishing a network of people willing to provide constructive criticism.

Robert Greiner 0:00

I thought we're in chapter four, but we're on chapter no we are in chapter four. I keep getting them all sorted out of sorts. Yeah. How are you doing though? Everything going? Well, you said, You've been working burning the candle at both ends.

Tiffany Lentz 0:17

Yeah, I'm, I'm overall I'm really good. Like, I love the work. I'm doing just just a heavy load right now trying to get some big projects done and get things launched, create reusable assets and get the circle structures, right, all those things that are like, you know, kind of startup that take a lot of time, more time than just the design, or standard design or execution of things. But I'm fine, I'll be good. A few busy handful of days, and then I'll catch up on my rest.

Robert Greiner 0:50

Yeah, good. Good, good. January was busy. Like we had some RFPs. And it's slightly took a little bit of time off. But everyone needed something at the beginning of the year.

Tiffany Lentz 1:01

Yep.

Yeah. You seemed slammed in January.

Robert Greiner 1:05

Yeah, we had a few things. Well, actually, stuff was supposed to be do Christmas week. And then I think it would have been but there was this open question period. And the people that needed to answer the questions didn't really feel like getting back to us during that time. And so they pushed everything back, which was nice. It gave us just enough time to take, take that week off and then kind of scramble when we got back.

Tiffany Lentz 1:28

Yeah.

All right. Well, cool. Well, I think we're gonna talk about healthy disagreement today.

Robert Greiner 1:36

Yeah, I read the wrong one ahead. Now. So

Tiffany Lentz 1:40

do you want to take a minute to skim it again? Since you did read it? And

Robert Greiner 1:43

no, no, I have I have the Kindle up and I took notes and highlighted Oh, so I think I'm good. But this is chapter four. Right? The Good Fight Club. Correct is the psychology of constructive conflict. Alright, so chapter four. Yeah. The Good Fight Club,

Tiffany Lentz 1:58

the good fight club,

Robert Greiner 1:59

the psychology of constructive conflict.

Tiffany Lentz 2:02

Yeah. It was so interesting to me. The couple different examples. Since we've been talking about families and things, the couple of different examples that were they cited of how people do this at home, how the Wright brothers were one and even the author talking about how his family encouraged this sort of discussion over the dinner table. Was it like that when you grew up? It was not at my house.

Robert Greiner 2:28

no, no, no, no, no, no. So they talk about productive disagreement versus what was it personal, personal disagreement? No, like my parents, they did like the disagree behind closed doors. Like that kind of thing. It was not encouraged to, to have a different opinion.

Tiffany Lentz 2:45

Right.

Robert Greiner 2:46

But we turned out alright, so

Tiffany Lentz 2:47

yeah, it did turn out all right, we did. But I really value that sort of that that sort of vulnerability and transparency. I don't know why, for some reason, it felt different to me to hear it talked about, like I can fully value it at work with friends. I love that sort of, you know, tearing, tearing different opinions apart. But the idea of fostering that sort of conversation over the dinner table was really interesting to me. might be fun to do more of that in one's home.

Robert Greiner 3:15

So they they talk about, okay, it's relationship conflict. So productive disagreement? Or what was it? Task conflict and relationship conflict? So relationship conflict, because you're such a jerk. You're so mean.

Tiffany Lentz 3:27

Yeah.

Robert Greiner 3:28

Name Calling unproductive?

Tiffany Lentz 3:30

Yeah,

Robert Greiner 3:30

personal attacks, that really focus on an affront of the relationship that you have, although I do think, productive conflict. And you can say, hey, I'm disappointed in the way that you brought this up, or whatever. But it's really talking about at an unfair attack at the human, instead of the task conflict, which is much more productive and focusing on on the problem makes the problem the enemy,

Tiffany Lentz 3:55

or even another way, maybe of looking at it, too, was so. So yes, the way you described it being the giver of the feedback or the initiator of the conflict, being needing to be disciplined. And then the other way of looking at it is that the hearer is disciplined enough to, to kind of refuse offense and not let things go to a relational conflict point. Just because someone brings something up doesn't mean it's a personal attack, they actually their disagreement can be that that sort of iron sharpening iron concept if you're willing to set your ego aside and listen to what they're saying, which I thought was just just a really good reminder and kind of makes you or makes me anyway hungry for healthy conflict and healthy teams. Where groups of people are willing to, to kind of agree for really good outcomes, and everyone refuses to take it personally.

Robert Greiner 4:55

Yeah,

so I had a bit of a disagreement at work last week, still trying to jogged my memory on the chapter here. And I remember thinking, like, is this person attacking me personally? And the answer was no, of course, like, most of the time, that's not the case, right? When people are disagreeing with you. And then even like asking that question like that, that sort of rage, it might be the wrong one might be too strong a word, but like that, that heat, that kind of flare of anger, competitiveness, like, whatever, it's someone challenging, that sometimes, like you get, or I get a lot, I mean, maybe just because of the way I'm wired, it really helps the short circuit, like it kind of takes you out of that mental spiral. And so I remember thinking, like, oh, that's, that's actually pretty helpful, because I don't know how long I would have, you know, stuck around in, in this unhelpful state. But it was good to know, I know, this person is genuinely, like engaged in the dance. Right? It's, he's not trying to cut me down or, or take exception to me as a person. It's just like, we're talking about the idea here. So it really helps to snap me out of it.

Tiffany Lentz 6:05

Actually had a really good example of this this week. And we'll say late last week, and this week, also with peer, colleague, just we were disagreeing on whether or not this pretty critical communication had happened. And as we continued kind of arguing our points, basically, and trying to look for, look for supporting facts, as one does, you know, searching through email, like I thought I sent this, I thought I said that, so back and forth. I think for both of us, it was starting to become a little bit personal, because when you're challenging that way, it's almost like you've doubt what the other person is saying. And I was very encouraged by this conversation was like, off and on for a few days, and I was very encouraged by a both of us are our willingness to step away, and try to understand the other person. And, and in you know, in our vernacular, looking at lay thinking whole brain, you know, someone the informal communicator, formal communicator, more pi style, or is someone more strategic or more task oriented, I found that I was dreading the first time we came back together to try to resolve the situation. And then I realized that that person had been doing the same thing I was, which was trying to step away, and, and understand the other person's point of view and also understand their specific communication style and needs. And it just so happens that we are very different in our communication styles, especially when under pressure, I tend to be more communicative and like more of a personal style communicator, and they tend to be more of a documentarian. And it helps to come back together and realize that, yes, there was still conflict. And yes, there was still a great disagreement and a problem to sort through. But we were slowly chipping away at a way that we needed to meet each other's needs in the future, just simply by understanding each other a little better. But it took several cycles of this truly like a Fight Club, of tearing apart details, understanding where the mistake was made, going back and like reliving a situation and then resetting expectations for one another, so that we can work really well going forward. It was kind of a fascinating experience to go through in light of recording this podcast. Because yeah, I love this quote in here I highly was when I highlighted it says the absence of conflict is not harmony, it's apathy. And I think that's true in so many ways, just the either rollover response, or the disengage, or the just move, you know, brush past something, because it's not worth, quote, quote, fighting for, in this case, our ongoing working relationship being solid was worth fighting for much more so than the than the issue that we needed to resolve. Does that make sense?

Robert Greiner 9:05

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. And in this chapter, there's a couple leadership nuggets here, which is really cool because some sometimes these books are more like, you know, generic focused, and then you have to think about how to apply it to you as a leader or your organization. But early on, so So what you're talking about is you added someone to your challenge network, which is a completely new concept for me, Adam Grant will talk about the support network, which we all know right, we hit we need our group of cheerleaders, encouragers friends that can help us get through tough times. personally, professionally, though, you also need a challenge network, which I think people can play that dual role, which is a group of people we trust to point out our blind spots right help us overcome weakness. Their role is to activate rethinking cycles by pushing us which is really cool. And then if you apply that to leadership, he points out research Which that reveals when firms perform, perform poorly CEOs who indulge in the support network, not the challenge network who kind of embraces conformity, they become overconfident, stick to their existing plans, and then I'll end what he says is, which is a great line, right, which sets them on a collision course with failure. And so what you're talking about doing here, because I think you, you build a support network, you build a challenge network, brick by brick, you can't just go find six people to be part of your support network. It goes, it grows more organically. So you went through this effort, which was not apathetic, right, it was very intentional and showed a lot of human level caring on both sides. And now you have someone in your challenge network, who by the way, would support you probably, if you needed that too yes. So. So I think it part of it's important for you to be clear about the role. I think you're looking for the other person to play. Like, I heard a good good advice that one of my friends uses with his wife, he's like, Do you want a wrench or an ear? Right? Do you want me to listen? Or do you want me like to help solve the problem? And so I think that what a gift though, to have, like a challenge network, and people who you have you give the benefit of the doubt to who you trust, who can help point out your personal professional, blind spots? I mean, you can you can really avoid a lot of catastrophe that way, I think.

Yeah.

That's good. You're spot on about building that building that that network brick by brick, it's not something that it seems to happen circumstantially, serendipitously, based on an so many different factors that I think it's probably something that is ever ebbing and flowing throughout our personal and professional lives. It's good.

Yeah, there's a point here, though. So there's, like the Wright brothers would had this, like pretty epic conflict, had it out then showed up the next day and acted as if nothing happened to actually like, helped figure out how the propeller on the plane was supposed to work. I do think there's, there's something this chapter missed. And I don't know that it was really in the scope of this book. But if you have role power in it in a situation. So like, if you're facilitating, facilitating a discussion with your direct reports, you can't I don't think engage. And I said, I don't think but I really feel strongly about this. I'm pretty sure I'm very confident, you cannot engage in the same level of open, aggressive task focused conflict, even though it's pointed out the task, I think the real power side of the equation really causes people. How do I say this causes people to think you're attacking them when you're not? Like, I've been there before, too. And so I think there's some carefulness that has to that has to be applied to the situation, if you're in a leadership role. Yeah, you can't just come in very aggressively attacking the problem. But encouraging your team to battle with that, I think makes a lot of sense.

Yeah. And even facilitating a way for them to do so. Maybe facilitating Well, brave spaces facilitation, I don't know how much you've been exposed to that at work, but we've been slowly working it into the organization and are about to train 12 or so more people on facilitation separately from safe spaces facilitation, which is what was the rage for such a long time, this concept of, you know, agreeing to disagree and just feeling safe saying what you think and brave spaces, kind of creates that a creates a space where you need to power through differences, not all differences, but some and even highlighting, which are a need for the collective so you know, which ones to to kind of argue your way through again, without making it personal. So to your point, a, a manager could set that scenario up, and then encourage that sort of behavior as almost like a rule of engagement with a team.

Yeah, yeah, most definitely. I think your role as the leader in the situation is to facilitate the task conflict not to participate in the task conflict. That should be with peers and above Yeah,

yeah. And then you layer on another thing that was missed here just isn't just wasn't in his agenda for lots of reasons, I'm sure. But another thing that wasn't here was you layer on being the leader and then being the leader of say, a group of people from all from different cultures, different backgrounds, ethnic backgrounds, they, everybody responds differently, they respond differently to one another, and they respond different differently to Americans respond differently if English is not your first language. People can tend to be to have a really great thought to contribute but to be less participatory doesn't mean that they don't have something really important to bring to that healthy conflict. So, as the manager, if you're in that scenario, then you get to get to sort out all of those nuances as well. So you get the best outcome, I think.

Yeah. Yeah, definitely.

I have a question for you switching, switching gears in the chapter a little bit. I was I'm always intrigued by the people pleaser concept. Because I think I think in my earlier years, I was very much a people pleaser, and I'm not anymore. Do you know many? Do you work with many people these days who are full blown people pleasers, like don't want people mad at them,

I used to be that way for sure. For me, and I'm not saying it this way with everybody. But for me, it was kind of a self confidence thing, like, especially early in my career, like I found it difficult to share knowledge too, which is silly as a software developer, like everyone gets better when you create like a reusable component that someone else can use, you don't have to reinvent the wheel, those kinds of things. I was more timid about, like sharing stuff. And also people being upset about my work product or my performance or whatever. So I've certainly played the role of people pleaser, I don't know that I know many though, do you?

Not that I work with? And I think I would struggle, I think I would struggle with working with them. Because I would I find it, inauthentic. And I don't mean to be super harsh, but that's how I often I have a couple of them in my family. And I always I always feel bad for them. Like, you're, you're not able to be your real self, because you're so worried. So you're worried about people not liking you, but the person that they don't like is not really you, because you're not being honest about who you are. Yeah, you know, and, and it is, it is often it's hard often to, you know, give them advice, when they ask like, Well, my best advice

which persona am I talking to?

or my advice is, you know, have a heart to heart conversation with them. Oh, no, no, no, I can't do that. So it's it's very, it's, it's almost like they back they back themselves into a corner. And the risk is, well, people won't like me, or if I give them advice, and it doesn't work out, they'll be mad at me. But the exchanges, you don't have deep authentic relationships. I think that people

Yeah, you know, I've that's really, that's really, I think, profound. The the closest advice I've heard professionally is, you should be like, obviously really honest, when you like, apply for a job, for instance, and when you're what you put on your resume and how you conduct yourself and the interviewer and the questions you answer. And it's like not, not because that's the moral thing to do. But because how crummy would it be to actually get the job with a facade of like, they're expecting something different, and then you can never be yourself? Or when you are, then it, it creates immediate tension. And so yeah, I can see that sort of over people pleasing was like, you can never, you're kind of stuck at that point. It's like you have to keep up the jig. Right?

Yeah. Yeah. Or you can imagine doing this Oh, like dating sites or something which I abhor the the very idea that you would lead with something you're not like, why would you do that? So that you don't get rejected? But what happens when the person is, not a good long term plan?

Yeah. But the funny thing is, too, I mean, there's so many different people out there and so many different organizations, so many different teams, like there's one that you're wired for, yes.

Yes.

Like, I'll, I'll use my me as an example. So where we work, you can be you can let your competitive juices out without winning at the expense of others. Like, we don't have a commission structure, for instance, right. And so it's easy for me, for instance, to bring people along on a business development journey, and coach others to do the same, because I'm actually incentivized and judged to do that, like the expectation is that I do that. And since there's no commission, you know, I don't have to worry about scoreboards and things like that, which I think would turn me into a bit of a monster over time. And so like I happen to be, you know, we don't do it, everything perfectly far from it. But this is one thing that's like aligned with me, and now I am in a place where I can, I don't have to change who I am. I don't have to rein that in as much, and it's for the betterment of others. Like there's those things out. There's different configurations for every one. That's one of the great things about you know, the world we live in there's there's some flavor of ice cream for you. And there's an I may hate that flavor of ice cream, but there's a bunch of other people that love it so here. You're much better off spending your time searching for the people who like the same ice cream as you instead of trying to force feed yourself a flavor that you hate.

Yeah, yeah. So much better just being being honest and real, like, yeah, being real and true to yourself.

You know, the hard part on that, though, is when you have someone on your team, that the organization is not a good, they're not there's not a good fit. We're not a good mutual fit. You know, I can get around. Humans not being a good, like individuals not being a great fit, because in my mind is like, Okay, you're the leader, you adapt your style, to make it work fine. But the organization itself, like we've had people, that their entire passion and skill set like we couldn't, we can't get enough project work to sustain that, right? So you have, you need to go to Google, right? Whether you can do that full time.

Sure.

And it's kind of tough, because as much as you want them to stay, and have a meaningful career, it's like, there's nothing you can do.

Yeah, or culture fit is equally as hard. If someone is wired for much more hierarchy than we have, they won't, they ultimately won't be happy. There's just it's a conflict that can't be resolved. Because the, the foundational elements are just not, they're not built from the same material, rightly or wrongly, which is actually something I appreciate a lot about our interview process is very, very rigorous. And the element I really appreciate about it is the emphasis on understanding what the candidate is really looking for in a culture and us very transparently representing what our culture is, like, if you don't if you don't like it, don't marry us. You know, it's okay. No hard feelings. It is it's very, it's sad and frustrating to have someone see someone come and be very uncomfortable. And they have so many wonderful attributes that will just never fit. Yeah. And it can it can then become relational, personal, and, and were on all parties, which is never the never the outcome you want.

And then going back to your people pleaser mode, the more you try to make that work. The longer you try to make that work, the worse, then the outcome is at the end.

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

So do you do you get energized by conflict? Because I definitely do. Like, I love it.

Oh,

that's a very good question. In many, many circumstances. Yes. I do. Not in all circumstances.

Oh, that's true. Yeah. I don't like finding with my family.

No, I don't like

there's nothing energizing about that. In work settings, though. I would typically. And I like it. It's the same thing. When you're when you're mentoring someone, it's like the energy that they bring. You can kind of match. Yeah. And so I like it when people are super engaged and animated. And like, I kind of feed off that energy. I'm very disagreeable like I'm a disagreeable person from the probably not probably not a full standard deviation, given the way that this is ironed out in the book, but definitely the challenging side. And energized by conflict and things like that, which is tough, because if you're working with people, you have people on your team that are on the opposite end, even if they're not full on people pleaser. You have to be careful there as well.

Yeah, I enjoy having Well obviously, I enjoy having conversations with people with your, with your, I guess, the composition of disagreeable that you're describing, because I think those I often associate that with, with critical thinking in a way that that not only makes the conversation interesting, but gets you to a good design or process, you know, so I think when you're asking me like do I do I kind of embrace or crave conflict? Absolutely. In a, in a problem in a space where you need to solve a problem in a process, a process space that needs to be there designed or redesigned. I really enjoy the conflict. I enjoy the the tearing apart and constantly trying to put the pieces together until you find something optimal even if it's a temporary optimal solution. So yeah, there are I would say most scenarios if something is to, to kind of smooth. It bores me. That makes sense that I Yeah, some I don't, I don't enjoy conflict at every turn in every circumstance, for sure. But I also don't run away from it. I find it sometimes hard to not continue to lean in. Because again, that feels authentic to me. It feels like you get to a better place relationally and through the outcome of the resolution. The tasks, but that's also sometimes that's appreciated, and sometimes it's not.

Right. Right, right. Well, I think we covered the main pieces. Any any other points you wanted to cover?

No, I don't think so. I was just looking at my own notes. Here. It's a, it's not a very long chapter, it's got some got some, some good tidbits in, I mean, probably the best, some of the best reminders for me were like, if you're willing to, if you're willing to have conflict and throw all throw different assumptions at the wall, you are likely to find an overall better solution. The Wright brothers had an example of the way they were designing their propellers and then Disney Pixar and the outcome of the Incredibles movie, the same similar examples that just were a reminder of, to me to like staying in that safe zone is not likely to result in something cool, and innovative. And something you can be really proud of, although it's, it can be a bit tenuous, getting there. So, yeah, not a very long chapter, but some really good reminders and to be courageous.

Yeah, and we'll kind of riff on this next time. Because there's the whole, like, focus on that, what he calls like the dance. So like in this thing that I think Adam Grant coined, and I had it stuck in my head for like over a decade, I feel is the strong opinions, loosely held, is like actually conveying an opinion forcefully causes others to go on the defensive about it. So there's a balance there. And so you have to, you have to kind of take into account with this chapter saying, which is, like when I'm arguing with you, it's not a display of disrespect, when someone's arguing with you, it's not a display of disrespect, it's a sign of respect, it means that the person that's, you know, trying to figure this out with you values you enough to contest your opinions, right? And if it didn't matter, they wouldn't bother. And so there's like, I think that's a good mindset shift where it's because people care, even if your incentives aren't aligned. And then when we get into the next chapter, it's going to be all about how forcefully those opinions get projected. And you are more believable when you're just when you're mostly Sure. not completely sure. Even like on as an expert witness on a jury. Right? Yeah. So I think that's there's there's some nuance in here that will I think, play out in the next episode.

Yeah, I'm looking forward to this.

Yeah. Yeah, me too. Maybe it's just me though, because I just read the, the wrong chapter, or I got a chapter ahead. And so now my brain was ready to talk about that one.

Oh, I'm sorry about that. I'm looking forward to because I don't think this is one of my strengths. I don't this this the that? Some of those nuances of sparring. So I'm, I'm always eager to have my own interpersonal conflict and chew them apart.

Yeah. And they're gonna give you better. Yeah, I think there's so when we talk about the next chapter, we'll cover this too. But this whole like retro spective on what you could have done differently in a conversation. When you get into an argument. There's some negotiation stuff, which we've covered before, which I think I agree with most of and so yeah, well, we'll dig into that. Double click on it. Next time.

That'd be awesome.

Yeah. All right. Well, hey, it's good to see each day.

Good to see you, too. Thank you.

Yeah, have a good one. Bye.