What role does misunderstanding and lack of trust play in conflict?

Inattention to seemingly minor interpersonal dysfunction in the short-term can blossom into
major conflict later on if the initial issues are not attended to, as Cory Dobbs relates in his
Academy For Sport leadership article entitled Managing Conflict: What happens if we do
nothing? Misunderstanding and a consequent lack of trust are major catalysts for conflict.
People face family, work and global challenges and pressures. This unsettled lifestyle is fertile
ground for misunderstanding and resultant lack of trust to grow. The rising fever of contention is
disturbing (Covey, 2011). What begins as a simple misunderstanding, if left unaddressed, can
fester and devolve into culture destroying toxicity. Lack of trust is debilitating to any
relationship and typically leads to conflict. As leaders, we attempt to communicate clearly and
we try and dispel misunderstandings as soon as we become aware of them. The vitality of
verbal exchanges comes from our desire to reduce the negative impact of misunderstanding as
much as possible (Garand, 2009).
As head coach of the varsity boys soccer team and program head, I experienced conflict with my
JV coach last season. He failed to complete required forms and required professional education
prior to the season. The conflict stemmed from a misunderstanding. I informed the coach that
the materials needed to be submitted or that he would be in non-compliance with the states
governing body for soccer. I did not give him a deadline in which to accomplish this task. He
assumed that the materials needed to be submitted before the season concluded. I knew that the
materials were expected by the state prior to the first match of the season. There was a
misunderstanding. From his perspective, I was being pushy and overbearing, by insisting and
constantly reminding him that the materials be submitted every week. The misunderstanding and
consequent lack of trust in our relationship stemmed from my failure to clearly communicate the
task and the associated deadlines/time frame for completion.
How does self-interest factor into disagreements and conflict?
Self-interest is defined as acting in the way that is most personally beneficial. Self-interest, in
and of itself, is not necessarily a generator of conflict. It is possible to achieve benefit for all
even when, and in fact because, individuals tend to act in their own self-interest. The view that
human beings act from self-interest and from self-interest alone is not new. It has long been the
dominant view in psychology and in much of Western thought. Thomas Hobbes, the seventeenth
century philosopher, believed that human beings always acted from self-interest. For example,
Hobbes explained that people give money to beggars because they try and relieve their own
discomfort at seeing the beggar in need.
It is important to understand self-interest because if one is to de-fuse conflict, one needs to
understand where the other party is approaching the conflict from. Knowing that the other side
in a conflict is operating to improve their self-interest should provide insight to you how to best
resolve the conflict.

There are several types of conflict. Interpersonal conflict refers to a conflict between two
individuals. Interpersonal conflict is a natural occurrence which can eventually help in personal
growth or developing your relationships with others. Intrapersonal conflict occurs within an
individual. The experience takes place in the persons mind. Hence, it is a type of conflict that is
psychological involving the individuals thoughts, values, principles and emotions. Resolving
intrapersonal conflict can result in empowerment. Intragroup conflict is a type of conflict that
happens among individuals within a team. The incompatibilities and misunderstandings among
these individuals lead to an intragroup conflict. It is arises from interpersonal disagreements or
differences in views and ideas. Intergroup conflict takes place when a misunderstanding arises
among different teams within an organization. This can occur due to the varied sets of goals and
interests of these different groups. In addition, competition also contributes for intergroup
conflict to arise.
How might you diagnose a situation in which conflict exists, but participants smooth over
the issues involved?
Many people are uncomfortable when it comes to confrontation. Some peoples need to avoid
conflict are acute. Sometimes people avoid conflict to the point that they have imaginary
arguments with the person in their own head. This need to avoid confrontation is so strong that
people have a safe confrontation in their mind and feel that the issue has been dealt with. This is
not productive. Conflict avoidance is likely to occur when there is a lack of self-confidence,
when leaders are generally unreceptive, when previous poor experience with conflict exists and
when a belief that conflict is bad prevails.
Avoiding the root issues and postponing confrontation are a sure recipe for disaster. The
resulting tensions which might stem from misunderstanding, lack of trust, and poor
communication will have a deleterious effect on the organizations culture. It is far better to
confront rather than to gloss over thorny issues. Exploration of the roles, relationships and
submerged feelings about and between people will undoubtedly lead to a better organizational
culture (Hammermeister, 2010).
I would certainly take steps to address conflict avoidance whenever I suspected it existed. I
would act as a facilitator, if necessary, to get the two parties to address the issue. Or, I might
give a block of instruction to one or both parties on how to engage in a healthy confrontation.
Here are some steps to take when confronting an issue. First, prepare yourself to confront the
real issue, not the peripheral ones. Second, make an initial statement and then let the other
person speak. Third, avoid arguing during the confrontation. Fourth, focus on the real issue of
the confrontation. Finally, identify action that can be done by one or both of you (McNamara, C.
1997).
Every person and organization grapples with conflict avoidance. Dawidoff, in his book,
Collision Low Crossers, ascribes the disaster that the NY Jets 2011 season was, to Head Coach,

Rex Ryans conflict avoidance. Ryan wanted what he wanted which was fair; he was the
boss. But he didnt like forcing what he wanted on reluctant peopleso he created friction, and
then, with his aversion to confrontation, he fled from it instead of reaffirming his demands
(Dawidoff, 2013, p. 423). Dawidoff recommended that Ryan exercise more creative clarity, to
tell subordinates what his wishes were and then hold them to them, and himself, to it.
Discuss how, as a coach and a leader, emotional reactivity and intellectual rationalization
might override your responsibility to lead student-athletes through conflict.
While confrontation will lead to a more useful resolution, it requires courage, discipline and
ethical thoughtfulness to confront. Lacking these core leadership qualities, coaches may be
inclined to rationalize that the situation may resolve itself through time or that the individuals
may work the situation out themselves. Sometimes an emotionally unstable coach may resort to
a coercive approach to conflict versus a mature, professional, transformational approach to
conflict resolution.
Teams are composed of a myriad of personalities. Everyone has their own set of concerns,
unique to them. The challenges confronting coaches and student-athletes are immense
considering school, family issues, health, and social issues. Coaches are pressured to accomplish
quite a bit with finite resources available to them. The pressure can be significant in a fast
moving environment. Accordingly, a coach may succumb to the perceived pressure and lose
their composure when conflict arises. They may not invest the time to build a relationship with a
student-athlete. Instead, they may neglect the issue with the hope that the situation might resolve
itself through time or they may react spontaneously with little forethought.
What is emotional intelligence and how might you teach your student athletes to become
emotionally intelligent students and athletes?
Emotional intelligence speaks to how well coaches comport themselves and then how they
conduct their relationships with others. Practicing emotional intelligence is highly correlated to
effective leadership. Emotional intelligence encompasses five characteristics and abilities: selfawareness, mood management, self-motivation, empathy, and managing relationships
(Hammermeister, 2010).
Emotionally intelligent coaches think in the long-term. They form positive relationship with
their student-athletes. They treat people with respect, kindness, honesty, and trust. Emotionally
intelligent coaches distribute their emotions such that they are excellent role models. They
inspire their student-athletes to perform at a high level, leading to a successful sport experience.
I teach my student-athletes to stretch and improve their emotional intelligence through
visualization. As a team, we recognize that emotions can hinder or enhance a situation. But, for
the most part, we want to achieve a steady state rhythm that will allow us to play at our peak
level. To that end, I conduct visualization training with the team during the season. Typically,

we conduct the session before training. Visualization sessions last 10 minutes. The players
achieve a relaxed state. I talk them through a soccer specific, positive act that they think about
and flesh out in as much detail as possible. Each player has their own unique act scoring a
goal, making a great pass, successfully marking a player, or making a throw-in, for example.
The players make it as vivid as possible by thinking about colors, textures, taste, sounds, and
smells. This is intended to give them confidence that they can and will be successful on the
field. They can also call up this positive act as part of their self-talk routine whenever they need
it, typically in times of adversity. A quick visual of the act is intended to get the student-athlete
back to steady state equilibrium so that they can play soccer at an optimal level.

References

Covey, Stephen. 2011. The 3rd Alternative: Solving lifes most difficult problems. NY, NY: Free
Press.
Garand, D. Misunderstanding: A typology of performance. Common Knowledge, DOI
10.1215/0961754X-2009-024, Duke University Press.
Hamermeister, J.J. (2010). Cornerstones of Coaching: The building blocks of success for sport
coaches and teams. Traverse City, MI: Cooper Publishing Group, LLC.
McNamara, C. (1997). Basis of Conflict Management. Field Guide to Leadership and
Supervision.