Controversy - How to use it as a constructive management tool

Conflicts are common in the mining industry. Engineers are accustomed to addressing issues such as land use, air and water pollution, and health and safety. Although conflicts of interest are important in the industry, they do not have the impact on organizational decision making that controversy does. Controversy is a type of conflict, probably the most important type, for effective decision making and competent problem solving. It exists when one person's ideas, information, preference, choices, conclusions, theories, opinions, or perspectives are incompatible with another's and the two seek to reach an agreement (Johnson and Johnson, 1979). Interpersonal and intergroup controversy is prevalent in the day-to-day functioning of organizations. If constructively managed, this type of controversy has important implications for effective decision making and problem solving. Too few organizational members accept controversy, and almost none attempt to stimulate it. This is because too few of them understand controversy well enough to accept and use it effectively. Most organizational personnel lack the interpersonal skills needed to stimulate controversy and manage it effectively. Discussion of conflicting ideas may not be common in problem solving situations due to the fear and anxiety most people feel in conflict situations. Traditionally, organizations suppressed conflict. They believed it was avoidable, caused by management errors. Optimal organizational performance required its removal. Conflict, though, is inevitable. And optimal organizational performance requires a moderate level of conflict. Management should manage the level of conflict and its resolution, for optimal performance. The current view stresses the importance of controversy for learning. Confronting a person with a different point of view stimulates that person to gather more information to elaborate, justify, or provide rationale for their position. Controversy: Process and Outcomes The decision making process begins with participants categorizing and organizing current information and experiences so that a conclusion is derived. When participants present their conclusions to another group and realize their conclusions are being challenged, a state of internal conceptual conflict or uncertainty ensues. This uncertainty motivates the challenged group to actively search for more information, experiences, and a more adequate cognitive perspective and reasoning process to resolve the uncertainty. Participants will adapt their cognitive perspective and reasoning through understanding the perspective and reasoning of others to derive a new or reorganized conclusion. This process may be repeated several times before a decision is reached. The active search for additional information on the alternatives is also promoted, along with greater mastery and retention of information and a more accurate understanding of opposing viewpoints (perspective taking). Of the many positive outcomes of the use of controversy, the effect on higher level cognitive reasoning and processing is especially important in engineering decision making. Research has been done on expert-novice difference in medical diagnoses, physics problem solving, and geological exploration. It shows that preparation for verbal interaction and the actual verbal interaction with peers with differing view-points promotes the development of expertise. Constructive Controversy Conditions Some controversies among decision makers concerning their preferred solutions to a problem can be beneficial. But sometimes they are not. As with all types of conflict, the potential for either constructive or destructive outcomes is present. Whether the consequences are positive or negative depends on the controversy and the way it is managed. The conditions and procedures of controversy management that determine the outcome include: the goal structure within which the controversy occurs; the degree of heterogeneity of decision makers; the amount of relevant information distributed among decision makers; the ability of decision makers to disagree with each other without creating defensiveness; and the perspectivetaking skills of the decision makers. Goal structure: Two possible contexts for controversy are cooperative and competitive. A