Explore
For Enterprise
Join for Free
Log In

Artes e Humanas
Negócios
Ciência da Computação
Ciência de Dados
Tecnologia da informação
da saúdesaúde
Matemática e Lógica
Desenvolvimento Pessoal
Ciência e Engenharia Física
Ciências Sociais
Línguas
Notas
Certificados

Explore todo o Coursera

Navegar
Pesquisar
For Enterprise
Entrar
Inscreva-se gratuitamente

Addressing Oppression-Based Conflict

Loading...

Optimizing Diversity on Teams

Universidade da Pensilvânia

4.1 (39 classificações) | 2.1K alunos inscritos

Curso 1 de 5 no Culture-Driven Team Building Programa de cursos integrados

By drawing on social science perspectives, this course enables you to learn what diversity is, and how to use it to maximize team performance, innovation and creativity. You also learn how to draw out the collective wisdom of diverse teams, handle conflict and establish common ground rules through real-world cases and peer-to-peer discussions. In addition, you discover how to overcome common biases faced in diverse teams. Systems of power, reward and rhetoric are discussed to help you create prosperous teams where differences flourish.

Visualizar o programa do curso

Avaliações

4.1 (39 classificações)

5 stars
20 ratings
4 stars
10 ratings
3 stars
4 ratings
2 stars
2 ratings
1 star
3 ratings

Na lição

Managing Conflict

In this module, we will move from promoting diversity to looking at the conflicts that can arise in diverse work environments. You will learn about why conflicts occur and how you can develop norms to address them. By the end of the module, you will be able to have better conversations related to diversity issues in the workplace.

M3 Overview3:04

Why Conflicts Occur5:18

Conflict Types and Origins5:08

Addressing Representational Gaps5:44

Conflict Resolution Strategies6:13

Addressing Oppression-Based Conflict5:31

Interview with Marybeth Gasman22:34

Ministrado por

Dr. Aviva Legatt
Affiliated Faculty
Derek Newberry, Ph.D.
Lecturer

Transcrição

I was once working in a competitive business simulation.

The team came together for the first time, and in this first observation,

they had a lot of information to learn about their task and one another.

There was no way that everything could go perfectly, but the team did its

best to come up with a compelling strategy and direction as well as rolls.

It appeared that most team members were engaged in a conversation about strategy,

but there was one woman, let's call her Pat,

who began to speak up less as the rounds went on.

At first, Pat had provided a lot of suggestions.

Many of her suggestions were positively acknowledged by the teams.

A lot of team members would say, good idea or we'll think about that.

But virtually none of Pat's ideas were supported by other members of

the group after the vague initial compliment.

As assimilation progressed the team moved along at an average pace but they

decided to shift roles in order to enhance their strategy about mid way through.

At this point in the assimilation,

Pat told the team to assign her any role that was available.

She also started to show up late to the team meeting and

she was quieter in conversations as each round passed.

I wondered, as many teammates did, why was Pat coming late?

And why was she unengaged in the simulation?

The possibility of race or

gender dynamics underlying her behavior were far out of mind at first.

After all this was a friendly group who came to the program to learn and

there was no apparent conflict within the team.

Team members assume that Pat's lateness was explained by other priorities that she

needed to take care of outside of the team.

And that directly related to the team dynamics.

As I observed the team over a longer period of time,

I realize that the team's first impression of Pat's disengagement was incorrect.

In fact, it became apparent that there was a deeper and

more implicit faction in the team.

The white males in the group were far more vocal, and

their ideas were accepted more often as a decision's made in the group.

There was little opportunity for Pat, who happened to be African American, and

a woman, to get a word in edgewise.

Also, no one reached out to Pat on a one on one basis after observing her

disengagement to find out what was going on.

While the white males on the team did not mean any harm and

in principle try to make an effort to include Pat in the team's decisions,

the team dynamics became quietly toxic by the third day of the simulation.

And the team unintentionally suffered from oppression based conflict.

This was caused by overlooking Pat's contributions and well being on the team.

The team, unfortunately but not surprisingly lost a competitive situation.

The reasons for this are two fold.

One, all the team members were not fully engaged in the group's goals.

Two, the team did not find ways to ensure that diverse and

varied perspectives were included in shaping strategy.

Ultimately these over sights limited the team from becoming high performing.

Unfortunately this dynamic happens all too often in teams,

whether you're based in the US or in another country.

There are always going to be prevailing power dynamics that favor the opinions

of the dominant or majority group and discourage participation of marginalize or

minority members of the group.

As history has shown, dominance over marginalized groups never works out for

individuals or organizations in the long term.

And why is that?

Because marginalization leads people to self center, and cuts out valuable ideas.

As the competitive business stimulation progressed, Pat's team ultimately lost

due to the quiet fracture and poor decision making that resulted.

It was surprising that this happened because the executives on this

team had deep experience and

were taking time to learn as part of an executive development program.

However they were reluctant to have the difficult conversations and productive

conflicts that would've been necessary to move the team from low to high performing.

Similarly at Enron, the company's silenced whistleblowers, who noticed

odd behavior in the organization right before the crash of the company.

Because Enron executives failed to listen to alternative perspectives on what

the organization was doing, the company chaotically fell apart.

The point here is not that the team members were purposefully ignoring Pat,

but even the highest performing individuals can easily

overlook certain viewpoints that don't align with their own.

This simple but profound act of overlooking someone's contribution

can lead to negative and even disastrous consequences for a team.

We'll now hear from Dr. Marybeth Gasman, Professor of Higher Education and

Director of the Penn Center for Minority Serving Institutions.

Dr. Gasman will discuss how to over come a pressure based conflict

in your organization.

Whether you are from the dominate or the marginalized group on your team.

The experience and knowledge shared by Dr. Gasman will help you to make even more

responsible decisions for your team and the individuals within it.

Explore nosso catálogo

Registre-se gratuitamente e obtenha recomendações, atualizações e ofertas personalizadas.

O Coursera proporciona acesso universal à melhor educação do mundo fazendo parcerias com as melhores universidades e organizações para oferecer cursos on-line.

© 2019 Coursera Inc. Todos os direitos reservados.

Baixar na App Store

Baixar no Google Play

Coursera
Sobre
Liderança
Carreiras
Lista de cursos
Certificados
Certificados MasterTrack™
Notas
For Enterprise
For Government

Comunidade
Learners
Partners
Developers
Beta Testers
Translators

Conectar
Blog
Facebook
LinkedIn
Twitter
Instagram
YouTube
Tech Blog

Mais
Termos
Privacidade
Ajuda
Acessibilidade
Imprensa
Contato
Diretório
Afiliados