Recently I was asked an interesting question that needs further elaboration, than the 30-seconds I could devote to the answer. The question, “As a disabled person, in a professional setting (workplace), do I expect others to accommodate me?” At the time, I used pieces of Douglas Malloch’s poem “Good Timber” as an analogy to help answer this question, stating that a tree in a forest does not demand another tree stop growing in their direction for sunshine, air and water. Thus becoming a forest giant through individual growth, adaptation, individual choice, time, goal setting, and working with other trees.
Here is Douglas Malloch’s poem “Good Timber” declaring the natural law, “Conflict is Good!”
Good Timber
by Douglas Malloch
The tree that never had to fight
For sun and sky and air and light,
But stood out in the open plain
And always got its share of rain,
Never became a forest king
But lived and died a scrubby thing.
The man who never had to toil
To gain and farm his patch of soil,
Who never had to win his share
Of sun and sky and light and air,
Never became a manly man
But lived and died as he began.
Good timber does not grow with ease:
The stronger wind, the stronger trees;
The further sky, the greater length;
The more the storm, the more the strength.
By sun and cold, by rain and snow,
In trees and men good timbers grow.
Where thickest lies the forest growth,
We find the patriarchs of both.
And they hold counsel with the stars
Whose broken branches show the scars
Of many winds and much of strife.
This is the common law of life.
Discussion
True story, I learned to swim by being thrown into the deep end of a lake and told to get back to shore on my own; my mother was never one for “easy lessons.” The conflict made me understand and learn how to coordinate movement, and I learned to swim. Not well, and to this day, I swim like I am beating the water into submission, not in a manner that is conducive to smooth and flowing coordinated movement. The conflict of motion and resistance, movement and flow has taught me a lot about science, engineering, hydraulics, and much more; but I do not thank my mother for this “swimming” lesson!
Good timber does not grow with ease:
The stronger wind, the stronger trees;
The further sky, the greater length;
The more the storm, the more the strength.
By sun and cold, by rain and snow,
In trees and men good timbers grow.
As a process of learning and developing, conflict has been the driving factor in all of our lives. Conflict is a tool, and like all tools, when used appropriately, it can build, enhance, strengthen, and create. Whereas, if the tool is improperly used, destruction, damage, and chaos are spawned. Regardless, life lessons can be learned in both uses of conflict when two additional tools are added, self-reflection over time. It took a long time to realize the value of science in the lessons of swimming taught in almost drowning. Remember, the forest giant in Douglas Malloch’s poem did not become a forest king without scars.
Where thickest lies the forest growth,
We find the patriarchs of both.
And they hold counsel with the stars
Whose broken branches show the scars
Of many winds and much of strife.
Conflict happens; what a person chooses to do with that conflict and how that person considers conflicting occurrences is how the labels “good,” “bad,” “valuable,” “beneficial,” etc., are applied. McShane and Von Gilnow (2004, p. 390) postulated, “conflict as beneficial [when] intergroup conflict improves team dynamics, increase cohesiveness, and task orientation. … [C]onditions of moderate conflict, motivates team members to work more efficiently toward goals increasing productivity.” The sentiment regarding conflict as a tool and beneficial is echoed throughout the research of Jehn (1995). Jehn (1995) reflected that the groups researched labeled the conflict as beneficial, good, bad, etc. based on the group’s dynamics and the conflicts faced and settled, the groups formed an integrated model for organizational conflict. Essentially, how the conflict is approached and used by the team members individually and collectively dictates how beneficial the conflict is for the team and the organization.
The stronger wind, the stronger trees;
The further sky, the greater length;
The more the storm, the more the strength.
By sun and cold, by rain and snow,
In trees and men good timbers grow.
Rao (2017) built upon previous researchers’ shoulders, perceiving conflict being a tool, and provided vital strategies for leaders to employ if they choose to minimize conflict; however, if conflict is minimized, a caution is required. Minimizing conflict just to minimize conflict is not the road to success, but the road to ruination. Douglas Malloch was quite clear on this point and it must be understood.
The tree that never had to fight
For sun and sky and air and light,
But stood out in the open plain
And always got its share of rain,
Never became a forest king
But lived and died a scrubby thing.
The man who never had to toil
To gain and farm his patch of soil,
Who never had to win his share
Of sun and sky and light and air,
Never became a manly man
But lived and died as he began.
Good timber does not grow with ease:
The stronger wind, the stronger trees;
The further sky, the greater length;
The more the storm, the more the strength.
By sun and cold, by rain and snow,
In trees and men good timbers grow.
Thus, it cannot be stated enough, nor without sufficient emphasis, the leader who chooses to minimize conflict is leading their team to destruction, ruination, and despair. But, isn’t the path of less conflict more restful and peaceful? What about all those people who claim conflict is bad, fighting and war are terrible things and should be avoided at all costs. Let us examine Douglas Malloch further:
Whose broken branches show the scars
Of many winds and much of strife.
As a child, I had the privilege of examining up close and personal a forrest giant. The closest branch to the ground was 35’ in the air, the trunk had a girth of more than 25’, and the tree stood on the edge of an embankment. Gloriously large specimen of a maple tree. The tree hosted several families of squirrels, birds, and who knows how many other woodland creatures. When the tree was permanently damaged by a hurricane in 1989, a company paid my grandmother a princely sum to harvest this tree for the hardwood. My brother and I counted the rings to know the age of the tree and got to over 200 years. A true forrest giant indeed. As the tree was harvested for lumber, it was discovered the tree had been shot and wounded, several branches had been damaged by fire, multiple branches had been broken off and healed over, barbed wire was embedded in the tree and some wood was poisioned by the iron, and the harvester told us a lot about what the tree had experienced during its lifetime.
Rao (2017) intimated that “conflict builds character, whereas crisis defines character” [p. 93]. Recognizing that conflict labels are an individual choice, and character building is a choice left to the individual to onboard or shun, one is left with several questions, when conflict occurs, and crisis happen, what do you choose, fold or grow?
Kipling writes a “Just So Story” titled “The Tree and the Grass.” The tree boasts about its strength, its height, its ability, and strength, and one day the tree falls prey to the wind and falls. However, what is not clearly delineated, is that the tree is not in a forrest, but on a plain. The moral according to Kipling was that, one should “never condemn others looking at your greatness as nothing exists for ever.” While the moral is correct, and the lesson important, the fact that the conflict and crisis the tree faced, the wind, was on this occaision crippling and life shattering, is the cogent point for focus. Douglas Malloch points out another very important point:
The tree that never had to fight
For sun and sky and air and light,
But stood out in the open plain
And always got its share of rain,
Never became a forest king
But lived and died a scrubby thing.
The tree on the plain is never prepared for crisis and conflict, and falls prey to both due to a lack of preparation. The tree that is born into conflict and crisis is prepared from day one to understand the role of conflict and crisis, and then face both as friends and tools. Thus the problems with leaders who choose to avoid conflict and why these leaders will flail, fail, and lead their teams and businesses into failure and ruination.
Thompson (2008) calls those who actively work to avoid conflict as those taking “trips to Abilene;” included in those making trips to Abilene are those who take conflict personally and choose to become offended, as well as those who choose not to see conflict, as a method of ignoring conflict. Thomas (1992) captured how individual choices about the valuation of conflict open or close the door to the productive use of conflict. Ignoring conflict, avoiding conflict, and other strategies to avoid conflict form the most dangerous people to be around, for when conflict grows beyond a point where it can no longer be ignored or avoided, that is the conflict that can destroy people, places, and things.
Thomas (1992) is echoe in Jehn (1995), Lencioni (2002), and Thompson (2008) declaring the distinction between conflict as a process and the structure in which the conflict process occurred is critical to how beneficial the conflict will be for the team, business, or society. Conflict is the mental thinking, adherence to operating procedures, and individuals working become the instigating factor, which is a threat to what is known or done at the current time. Hence, Thomas (1992) provided a keen insight into conflict as a tool, purposeful initiation of a process (conflict) to improve a structure (organizational environment).
When people recognize the power of conflict and purposefully employ conflict, everyone receives the potential to improve through conflict (Lencioni, 2002). Thus, conflict continues to be a tool, nothing more and nothing less. The disparities between organizational conflict labels are critical to understanding the chasm between teams evaluating conflict as the process and business structure. The gap in understanding conflict’s results can create inhibitions to future organizational conflict and create unneeded additional conflict processes while undermining the organizational structure.
How will you choose to use conflict? Will you grow or fold? Will you break yourself to become better knowing that the deadwood you cast off is healthier long term than holding onto the past and pretending you are still able to hold onto everything? Will you keep an open wound instead of allowing time and healing to form a scar and a callous to protect you from additional injury? Is the injury worth growing or is the injury too much and it is time to fall and die? Conflict and crisis will define or defeat based solely upon the choices you make. How will you decide?
References
Amason, A. C. (1996). Distinguishing the effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict on strategic decision making: Resolving a paradox for top management teams. Academy of Management Journal, 39(1), 123-148. doi:http://dx.doi.org.contentproxy.phoenix.edu/10.2307/256633
Baron, R. A. (1991). Positive Effects of Conflict: A Cognitive Perspective. Employee Responsibilities & Rights Journal, 4(1), 25-36.
Brazzel, M. (2003). Chapter XIII: Diversity conflict and diversity conflict management. In D. L. Plummer (Ed.), Handbook of diversity management: Beyond awareness to competency based learning (pp. 363-406). Lanham, MD: University Press of America, Inc.
Du, F., Erkens, D. H., & Xu, K. (2018). How trust in subordinates affects service quality: Evidence from a large property management firm. Business.Illinois.edu. Retrieved from https://business.illinois.edu/accountancy/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2018/03/Managerial-Symposium-2018-Session-IV-Du-Erkens-and-Xu.pdf
Jehn, K. A. (1995). A multi-method exanimation of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. Administrative Science Quarterly, 40, 256-282.
Lencioni, P. (2002). The five dysfunctions of a team: A leadership fable. Hoboken, NJ. John Wiley & Sons.
Lumineau, F., Eckerd, S., & Handley, S. (2015). Inter-organizational conflicts. Journal of Strategic Contracting and Negotiation, 1(1), 42-64. doi:10.1177/2055563614568493
McShane, S. L., & Von Gilnow, M. A. (2004). Organizational Behavior, Third Edition. Boston: McGraw-Hill Companies.
Moeller, C., & Kwantes, C. T. (2015). Too Much of a Good Thing? Emotional Intelligence and Interpersonal Conflict Behaviors. Journal of Social Psychology, 155(4), 314-324. doi:10.1080/00224545.2015.1007029
Rao, M. (2017). Tools and techniques to resolve organizational conflicts amicably. Industrial and Commercial Training, 49(2), 93-97. doi:10.1108/ict-05-2016-0030
Thomas, K. W. (1992). Conflict and conflict management: Reflections and update. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 13(3), 265-274.
Thompson, L. L. (2008). Chapter 8: Conflict in teams – Leveraging differences to create opportunity. In Making the team: A guide for managers (3rd ed., pp. 201-220). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
© Copyright 2021 – M. Dave Salisbury
The author holds no claims for the art used herein, the pictures were obtained in the public domain, and the intellectual property belongs to those who created the images.
Emperor Titus Flavius Vespasian began work on the Coliseum of Rome in 69 AD. Upon completion of the Coliseum, his son Emperor Titus held 100-days and nights of festival in the Coliseum. Ostensibly to calm the masses after the civil unrest following the death of Emperor Nero, the Coliseum acted precisely as it was planned, distract the masses, while the emperor consolidated his power, undermined the Roman Senate, and set the stage for the end of the Roman Empire. Roman laws were built, originally, upon the consent of the governed until the emperors broke the law. The people rebelled, and before the squabbling senators could take control, the Roman government was subjugated to empirical rule. All historical facts, reflecting the power of the consent of the governed and a lesson upon which we can plot the future if we are brave enough to take action.
The consent of the governed is built upon the intermingled trust between people as a body electing government officers and people representing those elected as government officers. The problems have arisen because many in public office have refused to accept the government of those who elected them and have served only themselves and the monied interests buying their time. Thus, trust propensity in government has dropped to disastrous levels. Adding to the problem are the accumulated actions of previously elected officials who have set a pattern for personal wealth by tax and spend, supporting political cronies, and gerrymandering system to protect them from negative election results. The trust between people of shared values has been broken by those elected, who never shared values, who refuse to live in their home districts, and whose time and the highest bidder can purchase interests. Thus, is it any wonder that people no longer believe the lies of government are restless and agitated?
President Obama proved one thing while in office when you choose to hold hearings is as important as the content of the hearings, the legislation, and the political gamesmanship. Paying attention to all of the tricks and media hyperbole is all but impossible, and in the confusion, theft occurs. But, the law of unintended consequences means that the consent of the governed takes a beating when these tactics are played, and soon polls will show a more significant drop in approval ratings. (Remember how jock itch has a higher approval rating than Congress?) Politicians will scramble, the media will try and explain the findings, but the result is always the same, the consent of the governed is being removed at a more rapid pace, and every politician of a representative government needs to start paying attention!
The last time I discussed being a 
Loyal Oppositionists never use violence to control the thoughts of others. We refute ideas with more potent ideas. We employ words, conviction, and confidence. We love the freedom found under the “Rule of Law.” We are constructive in our comments, truthful, and we research and report, even if it means we must improve our individual actions to meet our ideals. Now, more than ever in American History, America needs loyal oppositionists to step forward, answer the call, and defend liberty against the tyranny thrust upon us.
While not precisely a ranked principle, a person’s character is witnessed; they are not spoken, not listened to, observed, and judged by others.
Confucius makes a powerful statement here for loyal oppositionists and their leaders.
I was working in a call center for a prominent online adult educator, where I questioned the software being changed and the rollout of the new software system. The software would not be finished and thoroughly user-friendly for an additional five years after the initial rollout. I expressed my dismay at rolling out a partially completed product when time and energy should have been put into finishing the software before rolling it out for all the employees. My director felt this was disloyal to the organization, trumped-up fallacious claims, and wanted to punish me for disloyalty. I walked out of that job; I was not disloyal then, I am still not disloyal to the brand. I am not loyal to that director or the supervisor who craved a promotion and signed off on my being punished on fallacious claims and charges.
For a long time, I have deeply respected QuickTrip (QT). Their customer service is of such outstanding quality; even when their fuel is more expensive, I still prefer shopping at QT. The people go out of their way to help you have a fantastic customer experience. I have never had a rude employee, a poor customer interaction, or left with an unresolved problem. I struggle with a cane and neurological issues and have had doors held open for me; cashiers have brought me my change, always a good experience at QT. Thank you!
7-10 days later, I receive a call to reschedule an appointment spending more than 2 hours talking to the representative, who finally schedules me an appointment with another non-LHI provider in Phoenix for 10 May 2021. I received a call from that provider confirming I have an appointment. Yet, a bait and switch occurred, and my appointment was then rescheduled for the same provider, same LHI facility, and I attended this appointment.
The officers go back to the receptionist, who two other people have now joined, names unknown, wearing scrubs presumably from the treatment rooms in the back. They then make several calls. Then one of the people asks if I can wear a mask but not over my nose. I explain it is a breathing volume problem I have, and any mask hinders my volume of air per breath and makes breathing difficult. The people behind the desk are seriously unhappy that my breathing problem does not have a name, a disease, or some identifying characteristic: the receptionist, the officers, and the people from the back return to a hushed conversation. I am still on the phone with Emily and on hold while Emily is trying to contact the site.
destroyed in customer service. Face-to-face providers need to be looking for solutions, not actively looking to inconvenience the customer. 100% of the medical profession IS customer service. How the provider approaches the customer (patient) is the number one factor in how that patient will respond to treatment.
DNC-Consulting 