Resolving Interpersonal Conflicts

Probably the most common scenario involving interpersonal conflict that I, as a college undergraduate, come across happens during group projects and assignments. When put in a situation where there are project deadlines hanging over our heads and exams around the corner, failure to communicate effectively and patiently could prove disastrous. One such incident was that which happened to a couple of friends of mine who were in the same project group. I will refer to them as A and B henceforth. It should be noted that A and be were also good friends with each other. They had weekly submission deadlines for different stages of their final project. To complicate matters, they had a new member join half-way through the semester. That semester, A had a relatively high workload from her core modules while B, on the other hand, had comparable workload from his co-curricular activities.

The problem arose when they had to submit project specifications as one of their weekly submissions. Owing to time table clashes and other factors, they did not meet until the day before the deadline. The group had five members, out of which one was new. B wanted to explain their whole project idea to the new member before proceeding with the project specifications. A, on the other hand, was more keen on meeting the deadline that was set for tomorrow. She stated that explanations could be done after meeting the immediate deadline. This conflict in their views snowballed into a rather heated argument which went dangerously close to affecting their personal relationship with each other.

What could have caused this conflict? Both A and B had rather acceptable reasons to disagree with the other’s point of view. It could be said that, given A’s academic workload, a dire want to finish things on time is understandable. One is bound to get agitated and annoyed when one has too much work and nothing is going according to plan. However, it could also be said that A’s reaction was nothing more than an emotional outburst; a result of the academic pressure she was facing. Also, she would have felt that it was rather pointless to make sure all group members were in sync before proceeding if it meant missing the deadline. On a lighter note, A gets irritable when she is hungry and she was hungry during the meeting.

B, on the contrary, could have been more interested in touching home base before proceeding because he thought he could eke out some new ideas from the new member. This is also understandable given the fact that the group was going to be working together for a long time and integrity within the team was important. B could have felt that it was pointless to meet deadlines if not all the members knew what exactly they were doing. However, it could be argued that given the deadlines, B should have sorted out his priorities. Also, B could have misunderstood A as saying that there is no need to explain the basics to the new member. She merely said it could be done later.

This is quite a complex problem. Both parties have supporting and weakening arguments. Yet, a simple solution like managing to meet sooner and more often than they did could have avoided this conflict. If they had meet sooner, B could have easily updated the new member and still manage to finish the assignment before the deadline, making A happy. The conflict in interests could be attributed to not only the situations A and B were in respectively, but also to their basic character traits. From my experiences with them, A often tends to be punctual and neat. B, on the other hand, is more creative and likes to explore new options with vigour. Again, on a lighter note, a simple solution could have been to make A eat before the meeting.

The real reason this conflict was resolved was the fact that A and B were good friends outside the project group. This made it easier for them to forgive each other, making sure that this conflict did not have any repercussions on future meetings. However, in a professional setting, how could we stop bad blood between two people with conflicting interests? In your opinion, who do you think had the right idea? A or B? What could have been the solution?