Category: Uncategorized

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 […]

Leading Through Conflict: A Department Chair’s Guide Resource 2G  ·  Conflict Type Deep-Dive 10–12 min ← Back to all seven types What looks like stubbornness or disrespect is often people operating from entirely different frameworks about how work should happen. Departments bring together faculty across generations, cultural backgrounds, and professional socialization experiences — each shaped by different norms about communication, authority, collaboration, and what it means to be a good colleague. When these frameworks collide, the result is often conflict that no one fully understands, because each person is behaving reasonably within their own operating system while experiencing the other person as unreasonable within theirs. These conflicts are frequently unspoken and unacknowledged. Unlike a resource dispute or a process complaint, generational and cultural conflict rarely gets named directly — in part because naming it feels presumptuous, and in part because the people involved may not have the vocabulary to describe what is happening. The chair’s role is to make the invisible visible. What Generational and Cultural Conflict Looks Like A senior faculty member is consistently dismissive of a junior colleague’s communication style, reading directness as disrespect. A junior faculty member experiences a senior colleague’s preference for formal, hierarchical interaction as […]

Leading Through Conflict: A Department Chair’s Guide Resource 2F  ·  Conflict Type Deep-Dive 10–12 min ← Back to all seven types The fight for influence in academic departments is rarely about authority. It is about whether someone’s expertise and contributions are seen. Power and status conflicts are among the most emotionally charged situations a chair will encounter — and among the easiest to misread. On the surface, they look like turf battles: a senior faculty member undermining a colleague’s initiative, a dispute over who gets to speak for the department, resistance to a junior colleague’s growing influence. Underneath, what is usually happening is a contest over recognition — over whose expertise matters, whose voice carries weight, and whether the department acknowledges the contributions someone has made. In academic settings, formal authority is limited. Status is shaped instead by scholarly reputation, years of service, informal networks, and the respect of peers. When any of these feel threatened, the response can be intense — because what is at stake is not just a title or a committee seat. It is someone’s sense of their professional worth. What Power and Status Conflict Looks Like A long-tenured faculty member consistently undermines a newer colleague […]

Leading Through Conflict: A Department Chair’s Guide Resource 2E  ·  Conflict Type Deep-Dive 10–12 min ← Back to all seven types Faculty are rarely arguing about the budget. They are arguing about whether their work matters. Resource scarcity is a persistent reality in higher education, and department chairs are often the visible face of it. When funding is limited, when course releases are constrained, when office space is tight — chairs must make allocation decisions that feel deeply personal to the faculty affected. Even decisions made fairly and transparently can generate significant conflict, because the resource itself is rarely what the conflict is truly about. Faculty interpret resource decisions as signals. A course release granted to one colleague and not another is not just a scheduling matter — it is a statement about whose research is valued, whose time matters, whose contributions the department sees. Understanding this subtext is essential to navigating these conflicts without making them worse. What Resource Scarcity Conflict Looks Like A faculty member pushes back hard on a travel budget decision. Two colleagues compete intensely for a TA assignment. Someone brings up at every meeting that their office is smaller than a peer’s. On the surface […]

Leading Through Conflict: A Department Chair’s Guide Resource 2D  ·  Conflict Type Deep-Dive 10–12 min ← Back to all seven types Faculty may not be disagreeing with your decision. They may be questioning whether you had the right to make it the way you did. Process conflict is one of the most frequently misread types of conflict in academic departments — and one of the most damaging when mishandled. It arises not from what was decided, but from how the decision was made. In academic culture, where shared governance and faculty voice are deeply valued, the process by which decisions happen carries enormous weight. A decision that might be entirely reasonable on its merits can generate significant resistance if faculty feel they were excluded, surprised, or not adequately consulted. The key distinction: faculty may actually agree with your conclusion while still being genuinely upset about how you reached it. Defending the decision in those moments — explaining why it was the right call — misses the point entirely. What Process Conflict Looks Like You announce a decision — a scheduling change, a hiring direction, a policy update — and receive pushback that feels disproportionate to the stakes. Faculty aren’t necessarily […]

Leading Through Conflict: A Department Chair’s Guide Resource 2C  ·  Conflict Type Deep-Dive 10–12 min ← Back to all seven types When the disagreement is really about who you are, no solution to what you’re arguing about will hold. Values-based conflicts are among the most difficult a chair will face — not because they are more dramatic than other conflicts, but because they resist the tools that usually work. You cannot negotiate someone’s professional identity. You cannot compromise on what someone believes the department should fundamentally be. And yet these conversations happen constantly in academic settings — over teaching versus research priorities, over what constitutes rigor, over equity approaches, over academic freedom. Understanding what makes these conflicts different is the first step toward responding to them effectively. What Values-Based Conflict Looks Like On the surface it can look like a disagreement about curriculum, hiring criteria, program direction, or departmental strategy. But underneath, what is actually at stake is each person’s sense of what the department should stand for — and by extension, what their work means. When a faculty member says “we are losing our identity as a research department,” they are not just making a programmatic argument. They are […]

Leading Through Conflict: A Department Chair’s Guide Resource 2B  ·  Conflict Type Deep-Dive 10–12 min ← Back to all seven types Not all conflict is the same kind of problem. Getting this distinction wrong means solving for the wrong thing. Of all the distinctions a chair needs to make, this is the most foundational. Task conflict and relationship conflict look similar on the surface — two people at odds, raised voices in a meeting, a faculty member who keeps pushing back — but they require fundamentally different responses. Treating one as the other is one of the most common mistakes chairs make. The Two Types at a Glance Task Conflict Disagreements about the work itself — curriculum design, program direction, research priorities, teaching loads, resource allocation. When managed constructively, task conflict can lead to better decisions, more creative solutions, and stronger outcomes. It is not inherently negative. Relationship Conflict Tensions rooted in personal dynamics — lack of trust, perceived disrespect, personality differences, or past unresolved history. Relationship conflict tends to be emotionally charged and erodes collaboration over time. It does not resolve on its own and requires direct attention to interpersonal dynamics. The Diagnostic Test Ask yourself one question: if […]

Leading Through Conflict: A Department Chair’s Guide Resource 2A  ·  Diagnostic Overview 8–10 min Conflict is rarely one thing. Your first job is to name it accurately. What appears on the surface as a disagreement about a teaching load, a committee assignment, or a resource decision is often rooted in something deeper — a values clash, an unresolved trust issue, a question of recognition or fairness. When chairs respond only to what they can see, they often address the wrong problem entirely. This resource introduces seven types of conflict that commonly surface in academic departments. Use it as a diagnostic starting point — not a checklist. Real conflicts are often layered, and you may recognize more than one type in any given situation. That is normal and worth noting. Seven Types of Conflict Select any type to explore what drives it and how to respond. 01 Task vs. Relationship Conflict Disagreements about the work itself versus tensions rooted in personal dynamics, trust, or past unresolved history. These require fundamentally different responses. Most common → 02 Values-Based Conflict Disagreements rooted in what the department should prioritize — teaching vs. research, innovation vs. tradition, or competing views of what constitutes excellence. These […]

Interpersonal · Overview Six Ways Leaders Undermine Change (Without Meaning To) Most leaders do not undermine a change they are asked to carry out through open resistance. It happens through small, often unconscious signals, a sigh of solidarity, a quietly granted exception, a conversation they keep meaning to have but have not. This is a diagnostic, not a checklist. The goal is not to work through all six patterns below. It is to recognize the one or two you are most prone to, and work on those. Some of these you will recognize immediately. Others may take a colleague pointing them out. Read through all six first Notice which ones feel closest to something you have actually said or done, then open those. 2.1 The Signals You’re Sending The small verbal tells that quietly tell your team you are not fully behind this. Open this module 2.2 Behavior Over Talking Points Your team follows what you do, not what you say in the room. Open this module 2.3 Where to Spend Your Energy Spending your energy on the people who will never move, instead of the people who actually could. Open this module 2.4 Empathy Without Commiseration Acknowledging that a […]