Take Stock: Strengths, Assets, and What’s in Your Way
Members must be logged in to view this content.
Members must be logged in to view this content.
Members must be logged in to view this content.
Members must be logged in to view this content.
Members must be logged in to view this content.
Members must be logged in to view this content.
Members must be logged in to view this content.
Members must be logged in to view this content.
Members must be logged in to view this content.
Leading Through Conflict: A Department Chair’s Guide Resource 3 · Framework + Scenario 15–18 min What someone says they want and what they actually need are almost never the same thing. When a faculty member says “I refuse to teach that course” or “this committee assignment is unfair,” they are stating a position — what they want, or don’t want, right now. That position is real and worth taking seriously. But it is the tip of an iceberg. Beneath it are the interests driving that position, and beneath those are the deeper needs that give those interests their urgency. Chairs who respond only to positions get stuck in binary standoffs. Chairs who learn to ask about interests and needs find pathways forward that neither side had seen. This resource introduces the PIN model — Position, Interests, Needs — and shows you what it looks like in practice. The PIN Framework P Position Above the surface What someone says they want — their stated demand or stance. This is what you hear first. It is often absolute, sometimes urgent, and frequently not the real issue. Positions are visible and easy to respond to — which is exactly why they can lead […]
Leading Through Conflict: A Department Chair’s Guide Resource 2H · Conflict Type Deep-Dive 10–12 min ← Back to all seven types The most dangerous conflicts in a department are often the ones no one is talking about. Avoidance-based conflict is different from other types in one important way: it does not begin with a confrontation. It begins with a choice not to confront — repeated quietly, over time, until the accumulated weight of unaddressed tension becomes something much harder to manage than the original issue ever was. Faculty avoid conflict for understandable reasons: fear of damaging relationships, uncertainty about how to raise concerns professionally, a belief that things will resolve on their own, or a sense that the chair won’t respond constructively. These are not failures of character. But avoidance, however well-intentioned, creates more problems than it solves. What starts as a minor irritation becomes a pattern. What starts as a pattern becomes entrenched. And when it finally surfaces — often triggered by something small — it arrives with the full emotional weight of everything that was never said. What Avoidance-Based Conflict Looks Like Two faculty members who used to collaborate now interact only when necessary. A faculty member makes […]