Sharing a laboratory with others is typically rewarding – peers in close quarters become a sounding post for new ideas and a support network for the highs and lows of research life. But you don’t choose your desk mates and things can go wrong. Regular Naturejobs contributor Shimi Rii recently experienced how small disagreements can escalate quickly. Finding the right way to deal with conflict is not easy but necessary in order to ensure a harmonious work environment.
I recently encountered a conflict in my office, a ~300 sq. ft. space I share with four graduate students. With each of us nestled into a 5-ft wide cubicle with pictures of friends and family, an emergency pack of ibuprofen and vitamin C, and granola bars for late night studying, the office is a home away from home. In this safe haven where we spend most of our waking hours, there is virtually no room for conflict.
When my office mate first started conducting the behaviour, it was sporadic and didn’t really bother me. (To protect the privacy of parties involved, I won’t describe the actual behaviour, which was on par with general housekeeping violations.) After a month, the frequency increased, and it began to directly affect me, whose desk was located adjacent to theirs. When I asked my other office mates how they felt about the action, they were indifferent. I was on my own to address the behaviour.
First, I decided to go with the Direct Confrontation Method. Every website reiterated that communication was the most efficient step in conflict resolution. I thought, “we are all scientists, so I will plainly state my case with the evidence I have accrued.” It was important to me, as a female, to avoid displaying my emotions and simply state that it was bothering me. I sought out a time when my office mate and I were alone, and I asked to please stop conducting the behaviour in my presence. The response: “I’ll try.” A waiting period ensued to confirm the effectiveness of the method. A few weeks later, the behaviour had not changed. I wondered, when the Direct Confrontation Method doesn’t work, what is the appropriate next step?
Many peers advised me to go down The Boss Route. Some suggested I go directly to my office mate’s Ph.D. advisor. I was hesitant; I felt that if I was to go down this path, I should consult my advisor first and carefully explain the situation, so as not to put anyone in a bad light and create tension between everyone involved. I also wasn’t sure whether either boss could effectively resolve the conflict, not having jurisdiction over the other graduate student: what would be an appropriate disciplinary measure to be doled out for behaviour that was bothering one person? Even if we came to an agreement, the monitoring of changed behaviour in the office would ultimately fall on me, and we would be back to square one.
Convinced that conflict resolution was a necessary skill to master in my own professional development, I struggled to resolve the issue peacefully, and on my own. As a month passed with no change, I began to doubt my confrontation skills and my general ability to express my point of view (or lack of it), and even wondered whether it was a gender issue. I avoided coming into my office, and it wasn’t until another office mate asked me what was going on that I realized the office conflict was taking up a lot of my daily energy.
I decided to try the Direct Confrontation Method once again, reiterating that the behaviour hadn’t changed. Confrontation #2 didn’t happen: the conflict was exposed at a supervisors’ meeting through a few people I had sought advice from. Several harshly worded emails later, the conflict was “resolved”, leaving behind a bad taste in everyone’s mouths.
I don’t recommend this ending to anyone. If you have a conflict, Act and Repeat. Don’t dwell in self-pity and over-analysis like I did. Another thing I regret not doing was Asking for Help. I wasn’t alone in my office, and I should have asked my office mates to help me make my point. In doing research after resolution, I also learnt that we have an Ombuds Office that provides confidential, impartial problem-solving assistance. Do Your Research and be aware of these departments in your university. With the nature of academic workspaces being unlike those in a company or organization with everyone having the same supervisor, the advice of someone unconnected to the situation is beneficial.
Readers, I’m interested in hearing your views. Have you experienced conflict within your office/lab, and how did you deal with it? If your method did not work, what was your next step?
Report this comment
Hi Julie, the approach and assessment of the situation is very crucial in dealing with your co workers, especially if they belong to the same lab and of course same supervisor. In my case once I had to face a similar situation at my current workplace. Being an ‘outsider’ I was not supposed to raise voice against any wrong doing by my ‘insider’ colleague. Having confronted him directly on one-to-one basis did not change anything. It was taking so much of my energy that ultimately I had to take the matter to our mentor. Very subtly I had to explain to him the problem I was facing, an ultimately I had to name the person responsible for my distress. Seeing the merit in my complain he intervened and I never faced a problem in the lab again. Point here is that suffering quietly and taking all the blame in hope that things would set themselves on right track does not help. Proaction is required. Another important point to mention here is the way you put your point forth. I have realized delineating the issue via e-mail is much more effective than verbal communication as all the points come ‘on paper’ and one can go over them time and again, if required.
Report this comment
Thanks for sharing. Its is very relevant to the current state of affairs with people from different cultures and therefore different personal preferences sharing work spaces. The idea of Ombuds Office is perhaps the least problematic and likely most helpful since you can take the liberty of talking it out without being concerned about how you will be perceived. It is a confidential discussion.
Also, these people are trained to resolve such conflicts. The only sad part, at least in my experience, is that that students at times don’t even know about it. Even worst is the case where Ombudsperson is not officially available for resolving graduate student issues. Its time that the universities take a serious note of this and make students aware about this avenue. In my case, I had an opportunity to attend a talk on “How to have a difficult conversation?”. Events like these could be good ice-breakers and may help in starting a dialogue, getting perspectives and ultimately lead to possible solutions.
Report this comment
Hi Vivek and Deepak, thank you so much for your comments. Your insights raise many valid and important points.
Vivek, thank you for sharing your experience. I’m wondering, how is your interaction with your lab mate after your supervisor intervened? Is everything back to normal? For me, my office mate’s supervisor is different from my supervisor, and both were inclined to protect their own grad student, which made the resolution complicated. I do believe, however, that the relationship between my office mate and I remained intact because I confronted him directly and didn’t “tell on” him behind his back.
This, I believe, is definitely where an Ombudsperson would be useful, and Deepak, I agree with you that many students are not aware of these offices or staff. We also tend to shy away from going to an official office, afraid that by taking that action we are “making a big deal” out of the situation. I think it is a great idea to have a talk on “How to have a difficult conversation”! We all get lab safety training but perhaps a basic teamwork/human resources training should be included for any new person that comes into the university.
Report this comment
Hi Shimi, you were fortunate. Resolution of any conflict in the work place is at least as dependent on the environment as on one’s own approach and especially on “the boss’ or “supervisor”. Not only that, there are always lab/ office politics in any work place. If the individual causing the problem is the supervisor’s favourite then you are onto a lose-lose situation. Often your work mates will know this and just put up with problem as best they can. Even in a relatively liberal UK university, the “Ombudsman” or “Students Rights Office” may not always be what it purports to be. In my case I was told that the “Students Rights Office” would help with difficulties outside the academic arena – trouble over minor civil infringements involving the police etc. I was also advised that I ran the risk of the academics closing ranks and criticizing my work as incompetent if I persisted with my complaint. The individual’s threatening behavior “altered” after I approached our joint supervisor but the relationship with the supervisor was irreparably damaged. He is now a “Fellow of the Royal Society”. I did complete my PhD but I could never use my supervisor as an employment referee.
Report this comment
Hi mat glyn, you hit the nail on the head with regards to the environment’s role in conflict resolution. I believe that each environment has its own unique relationships, quirks, and alliances that impede or in some cases, help in resolving these conflicts. I’m sorry to hear about your irreparable relationship; I was definitely aware of these potential consequences and thus treaded lightly in my path for resolution. Yes, I was extremely lucky. What do you think would have made it better for you? If you are in a similar situation in the future, but in a supervisory role, what steps would you take to do things differently?