Communications
Dyer and Harvey (1995) have written about reaching an atmosphere of constructive controversy to replace pretend agreement. Teams are a waste of time when team members only pretend to agree. Decisions made under false pretenses are not good decisions. The Abilene Paradox is an example of how four family members, while trying to please each other, agreed to an activity even though none of them really wanted to participate. In an organization the self-defeating results of a pretended agreement are the opposite of the goals desired. “The inability to manage agreement is a major source of dysfunction” which affects not only the team but which also weakens the organization (37). On the other hand, teams that are not able to agree due to controversy between members are not able to make good decisions either. This memo is about how to reach constructive decisions.
Pretended Agreement Management
A first step to resolving the problem of pretended agreement or “hidden-agreement syndrome” is to gather data (41). It may be better to hire an outside consultant to conduct interviews. Although in some cases it may be just as effective to gather the data inside the organization by holding problem solving sessions. The in-house strategy is good in order to gain role models who have changed their behavior. A drawback to in-house data gathering is the fear people feel when trying to honestly share their thoughts. The anxiety exhibited by this fear is exactly the feeling that has to be changed. The team members need to reach the point where they can state the problem, suggest a resolution, and talk about the consequences of keeping feelings secret. Another important point is that they become able to explain their disagreement during meetings. The team members all need to understand the theory of agreement management (42). Most important is the last step which is putting the newly learned behavior into action. The main change in behavior is to stop treating disagreements as conflicts but as a way to form good solutions.
Constructive Controversy
It is necessary to handle disagreements positively in order to make controversy constructive. All stakeholders need to be included in decision-making so racism and sexism are not in any way helpful. Dyer and Harvey (1995) note that this requires “multicultural planning and policy-making groups” in order to deal with the challenges. It is important for teams to work well so organizations can compete in a globalized world (43). People who under other circumstances would not get along must find a way to overcome their differences. In other words diversity can be managed in a way to make it an asset when “controversy is defined as a willingness to explore all sides of every issue” (44). Managers can make sure each team member is committed to the same goal. The shared goal is the glue that keeps the team on target. Members need to display a willingness to share their unique characteristics as well as accept dissimilarities in other team members. In order to recognize and appreciate success it is important to perform reviews at regular periods. Reviews will also help recognize any failures that need to be corrected.
Perceptions
Dyer and Harvey’s (1995) analysis of pretended agreement behavior and their guidelines to developing constructive controversy are helpful. It is information that can be used in managing similar problems in personal life and at work. The Internet has made the world so small that friendships and employment opportunities can be found even in the most distant countries from home. The problems I have noticed most commonly have been when people refuse to accept something different in another person or in a new place. This acceptance of others is the most challenging path to success but I believe it is also the most rewarding. The closing of the article explains why acceptance of diversity is so difficult; change in behavior requires “courage, sensitivity, and shared planning and participation” (46).
Conclusion
Managing teams is not an easy activity especially when first starting out. Finding and using good information from those with more experience can help more than anything. Dyer and Harvey (1995) have shared the pros and cons of two opposite problems that can ruin a person’s career in an organization because problems in a team negatively affect an organization. Honesty is the most important way for team members to successfully accomplish the shared goals. Recognizing the problem of hidden-agreement syndrome is step number one. Having the patience to work to build teams exhibiting constructive controversy decision-making is well worth the effort.
Reference: Dyer, W., & Harvey, J. (1995). Pretended Agreement Versus Constructive Controversy, In Team Building: Current Issues and New Alternatives. (3rd ed.). (pp. 33-46). Boston, MA: Addison Wesley Publishing, Co.
