Leadership, Power, Conflict - Week 10 Notes

Creating a Safe and Inclusive Space

  • Inhospitable environments lead to avoidance and defensiveness.
  • Receptive spaces encourage inquiry and deeper learning.
  • To ensure a safe space:
    • Hear all perspectives.
    • Ensure inclusiveness.
    • Do so without shaming or blaming.

Plan for Today

  • Leadership – different styles
  • Power – different types
  • Conflict – what invites it? How might we respond?
  • Apologising – should we?

Considerations about Leadership

  • It is a misconception that leaders should always be the most experienced.
  • It is a misconception that a leader’s main job is to keep the team happy.
  • It is a misconception that it’s not a leader’s job to help with personal struggles.
  • It is a misconception that if a team isn’t performing, the leader is to blame.

Leadership Styles: Authoritarian

  • Hold decision-making power and control.
  • Do not seek team input or consensus.
  • Task Focus: Emphasize task accomplishment over team engagement.
  • Prioritizes efficiency over collaboration.
  • Not particularly adaptive; difficulty with changes and differing perspectives.
  • Communication styles:
    • One-Way Communication: Primarily use one-way communication, transmitting orders and instructions to their team.
    • Clear and Direct: Communication is clear, concise, and direct, focusing on conveying tasks and expectations.
    • Controls interactions

Leadership Styles: Democratic

  • Involve team in decision-making; decisions reached through consensus
  • Promote open communication and teamwork
  • Empowers team members by giving them a voice and responsibilities
  • Actively engages and motivates team members
  • Communication style:
    • Engage in open dialogue, encouraging team member input
    • Active listening; value diverse opinions and ideas from team members
    • Authentic and transparent; freely sharing information to build trust

Leadership Styles: Laissez-Faire (’let do’)

  • Hands off style, minimal intervention – little direction or guidance
  • Team members have decision-making power and manage tasks themselves; are also held accountable
  • Encourage creativity within the team.
  • Communication style
    • Minimal Intervention: Laissez-faire leaders allow team members to communicate and make decisions independently.
    • Freedom of Expression: They enable team members to communicate openly and express their ideas without much interference.

Transformational Leadership

  • Focused on inspiring and motivating teams to achieve collective goals by emphasizing shared vision, values, and empowerment.
  • Developed by James MacGregor Burns and further refined by Bernard M. Bass, transformational leadership emphasizes raising team morale, fostering self-confidence, and promoting a sense of purpose among team members.
  • This approach involves identifying individual strengths and struggles, defining a compelling common goal, and guiding the team towards realizing that vision.
  • Transformational leadership encourages teamwork, innovation, and continuous improvement within organisations.
  • Four Primary Elements – 4 Is
    • Idealized Influence/Charismatic
    • Inspirational Motivational
    • Intellectual Stimulation
    • Individual Consideration

Situational Leadership: Adapting to the Moment

  • There is no single “best” leadership style — effective leadership depends on the context.
  • Success is shaped by:
    • The task at hand
    • The team’s skills, experience, and motivation
    • The environment or setting (e.g., high-pressure, routine, crisis)
  • Effective leaders are flexible — they:
    • Adapt their style to match the situation
    • Shift between directive and supportive behaviors
    • Respond to change, challenge, and team needs in real time
  • Great leaders don’t stick to one style — they read the room, read the task, and lead accordingly.
    • Hersey & Blanchard, 1982

Power

  • Power, as defined by Coleman & Tjosvold (2000), encompasses the ability to influence, control, or direct the behavior, actions, or decisions of others or situations.
  • In interpersonal relationships, power dynamics play a significant role in shaping interactions and outcomes.
  • Types of Power:
    • Direct Power:
      • Involves explicit actions or behaviors aimed at influencing others.
      • Examples include assertiveness, coercion, persuasion, and manipulation in one-on-one interactions.
    • Indirect Power:
      • Operates through broader social structures, group norms, and shared values.
      • Group dynamics, cultural norms, and institutional hierarchies influence individuals' power within social contexts.

Sources of Power

  • French and Raven (1959) in a very early but definitive publication identified 5 social sources of power:
    • legitimate or authority power (power associated with status, rank or position)
    • reward power (power attributed to others because of their perceived capacity to give rewards. These may be social rewards such as attention, smiling, affording status etc or material rewards.)
    • coercive power (power arising from the perceived capacity to exercise force or give punishment etc)
    • referent power (power to influence through the source’s affiliation with a group to which the person identifies strongly e.g. both parties’ passion for particular interest, religious, cultural, intellectual and/or social groups)
    • expert power (derives from an individual’s expertise. Their level of skill, competence and experience helps make them trustworthy and able influential to others)

Handling of Power In Health (Stenfors-Hayes, 2016)

  • Challenges in Practitioner-Client Relationship
    • Asymmetrical power between practitioners and clients/patients.
    • Practitioners hold legitimized, referent, and expert power.
    • Clients rely on practitioners for care and services.
    • Power imbalance hinders respectful, empowering relationships.
  • Power Dynamics and Imbalance
    • Medical and other professional jargon creates in-group and out-group divisions.
    • Complex terms confuse and intimidate clients.
    • Fear of incompetence stops clients from seeking clarification.
    • Imbalance leaves clients uninformed and questions consent.
  • Importance of Plain Language
    • Plain language enhances understanding.
    • Reduces cognitive load and stress.
    • Empowers clients to process information.
    • Provides autonomy and control for clients/patients.

What Gets in the Way of Engaging with Conflict?

  • Fear of worsening the situation
  • Fear of angering the other person and losing a relationship/job/connection
  • Fear of saying the wrong thing
  • Fear of retaliation
  • Fear that nothing will make a positive difference
  • Fear of triggering an argument
  • Fear of being seen as uncaring, overly sensitive, or judgmental
  • Fear that pent-up feelings will explode
  • Avoiding conflict to keep the peace
  • Fear of starting a fight you can’t win

Roots of Conflict (Shrumpf, Crawford & Usadel, 1991)

  • Limited resources
  • Unmet needs
  • Different Values

What Are Values?

  • Core beliefs that shape our behaviours, decisions, and worldviews
  • They are not “right” or “wrong” — just central to who we are
  • Why Values Matter in Our Work
    • We inevitably bring our values into professional interactions
    • They can influence clients, colleagues, and decisions — sometimes without us realising
    • Values guide what we emphasize, approve, or avoid in conversations and care
  • Ethical Considerations
    • Our values can communicate subtle messages of approval or disapproval
    • These messages shape:
      • Goals we set with clients
      • What we validate or challenge
      • How clients feel seen or judged
    • It's essential to remain aware of our own biases and their potential impact
  • Navigating Value Influence
    • Reflect regularly on your values and assumptions
    • Seek supervision and feedback
    • Engage in ongoing professional development
    • Values are dynamic — they can and should evolve over time (Proctor, 2014)

Unmet Needs

  • Idea that every human interaction carries basic needs — for respect, safety, understanding, autonomy, etc.
  • When those needs go unmet, tension builds, even if it's not immediately visible.
  • For example:
    • A client who feels unheard may grow passive-aggressive.
    • A student who doesn’t feel valued may disengage or lash out.
  • In many conflicts, the visible issue is just the surface layer — the real problem is that someone’s need wasn’t acknowledged or fulfilled.
  • Most conflict is not about the topic at hand — it’s about an unspoken emotional or relational need.

Limited Resources

  • This refers to anything that is perceived as scarce — time, money, space, attention, access to care.
  • For instance:
    • Two practitioners may argue over who gets a shared consultation room.
    • A client may become upset over a rushed appointment, feeling the practitioner “doesn’t care” — when really, it’s a scheduling issue.
  • Resource conflict can quickly escalate if communication isn’t clear about why limits exist and how they’re managed.
  • Resource conflict is often logistical, but it becomes personal when it feels unfair or unexplained.

Conflict in Health Care

  • Poorly understood roles
  • Power differentials
  • Highly stressful experiences for people
  • Limited resources – eg hospital beds, homecare packages, Centrelink payments
  • Lack of communication skills

Consequences of Unresolved Conflict in Health Care and Beyond

  • Poor client care
  • Burnout, turnover of staff
  • Decreased job satisfaction
  • Errors in practice

Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Model

The Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Model describes different styles of handling conflict based on two dimensions: assertiveness and cooperativeness. These dimensions lead to five different conflict management styles:

  • Competing (Forcing): High assertiveness, low cooperativeness. Individuals pursue their own concerns at the other person's expense.
  • Avoiding: Low assertiveness, low cooperativeness. Individuals do not immediately pursue their own concerns or those of the other person.
  • Compromising: Moderate assertiveness, moderate cooperativeness. The objective is to find an expedient, mutually acceptable solution that partially satisfies both parties.
  • Accommodating: Low assertiveness, high cooperativeness. Individuals neglect their own concerns to satisfy the concerns of the other person.
  • Collaborating: High assertiveness, high cooperativeness. Individuals work with the other person to find a solution that fully satisfies the concerns of both.

Managing Conflict

  • Forcing / Competing: Only one person wins; disrespects the other person’s rights and asserts my needs are more important than yours
  • Collaborating / Problem solving: I win, you win; problem solve in order to identify a solution that meets both people’s needs
  • Compromising / Sharing: You lose, I lose; both people give up some of their own needs to reach an agreement
  • Avoiding / Withdrawal: No one wins, remove yourself from conflict. The issue isn’t important enough
  • Accommodating / Smoothing: You win, I lose; give up your needs to agree with the other in order to end the conflict

Cultural Considerations (Barsky, 2014)

  • Power distance – cultural expectations about respect & deference to people in authority parents, bosses, elders, professionals
  • Collectivisms-individualism – extent that culture values individual needs over group needs.

Why Don’t We Apologise?

  • According to Schumann, 2018 - 3 major barriers to offering high-quality apologies:
    • (a) low concern for the victim or relationship,
    • (b) perceived threat to the transgressor’s self-image,
    • (c) perceived apology ineffectiveness.

Key to Solid Apologies – (Prothero and Morse, 2017)

  • Why Apologise?
    • Shows respect and dignity toward the client
    • Can reduce malpractice claims (Kraman & Hamm, 1999; Woods, 2004)
    • Helps practitioners preserve professional integrity
  • Two types:
    • Informal/Reflexive: “I’m sorry,” “Excuse me,” “Pardon me” – used for small missteps to maintain social harmony
    • Formal/Planned: Used in serious incidents or legal settings; requires preparation and accountability
  • An apology provides validation of the impact on the victim - an explanation of what went wrong, reason for the mistake, and responsibility with a commitment to prevent recurrence. The institution must be direct without covering or concealing. The level of formality signifies the importance and impact of the error
  • Why Do Apologies Fail?
    • Practitioners often only express regret, not responsibility
    • Avoid using the word “error”
    • Appear insincere or scripted
    • Lack assurance of future safety
    • Conditional apologies (“I’m sorry if you were hurt…”) undermine trust
  • Empathy ≠ Apology
    • Empathy = Sorrow for the patient’s experience
    • Apology = Taking ownership and addressing the harm
    • Both are important, but empathy without apology can feel empty
    • “Don’t insult our intelligence.” – Patient feedback on false apologies
  • Is an apology effective without remorse?