Skip to content
HR · Human Resources · programme 05

Resolve conflicts

Ease internal tensions in a neutral, supportive setting.

Why this programme

Play creates neutral ground where people cooperate without having to talk about it. The challenges are designed to require listening and mutual support, never confrontation. Sensitive input is given through anonymous voting, aggregated and projected, so people can speak up without exposing themselves.

As conflict—difference—is here in the world, as we cannot avoid it, we should, I think, use it.

Mary Parker Follettpioneer of management and conflict resolutionConstructive Conflict (lecture at the Bureau of Personnel Administration, New York), 1925

What your teams experience

  1. The bridge: two teams must together build a solution that neither can finish alone.
  2. Perceptions: an anonymous vote on what weighs on people, shown as a word cloud on screen.
  3. The rules of the game: co-write, as a team, three commitments to good cooperation.
  4. The closing: a cinematic that highlights what the room achieved together.

Each activity opens and closes with a projected cinematic sequence, personalised for your teams. The facilitator sets the pace: nothing moves forward without them.

What the company gains

Tension defused by doing things together, and three concrete commitments written by the people involved themselves.

78 %

lower absenteeism in top-quartile engaged teams compared with bottom-quartile teams, along with 23% greater profitability.

GallupQ12 Meta-Analysis, 11th edition, 2024

How we tailor it to you

Your wording, departments, figures and photos are built into the challenges and cinematic sequences, to the letter. The look follows your brand guidelines. Teams are formed on the spot or based on your organisation chart. The session report is delivered to you after the event.

The sources of this programme

Every game, measure and reminder in this programme builds on published research. The facilitator cites it in the debriefs, and you can check every reference.

  1. Jehn, K. A. (1995). A multimethod examination of the benefits and detriments of intragroup conflict. ASQ, 40(2), 256-282. 10.2307/2393638
  2. De Dreu, C. K. W., & Weingart, L. R. (2003). Task versus relationship conflict, team performance, and team member satisfaction: A meta-analysis. JAP, 88(4), 741-749. 10.1037/0021-9010.88.4.741
  3. de Wit, F. R. C., Greer, L. L., & Jehn, K. A. (2012). The paradox of intragroup conflict: A meta-analysis. JAP, 97(2), 360-390. 10.1037/a0024844
  4. Behfar, K. J., Peterson, R. S., Mannix, E. A., & Trochim, W. M. K. (2008). The critical role of conflict resolution in teams. JAP, 93(1), 170-188. 10.1037/0021-9010.93.1.170
  5. Lees, J., & Cikara, M. (2020). Inaccurate group meta-perceptions drive negative out-group attributions in competitive contexts. Nature Human Behaviour, 4, 279-286. 10.1038/s41562-019-0766-4
  6. Moore-Berg, S. L., Ankori-Karlinsky, L.-O., Hameiri, B., & Bruneau, E. (2020). Exaggerated meta-perceptions predict intergroup hostility between American political partisans. PNAS, 117(26), 14864-14872. 10.1073/pnas.2001263117
  7. Pronin, E., Lin, D. Y., & Ross, L. (2002). The bias blind spot. PSPB, 28(3), 369-381. 10.1177/0146167202286008
  8. Galinsky, A. D., & Moskowitz, G. B. (2000). Perspective-taking. JPSP, 78(4), 708-724. 10.1037/0022-3514.78.4.708
  9. Galinsky, A. D., Maddux, W. W., Gilin, D., & White, J. B. (2008). Why it pays to get inside the head of your opponent. Psychological Science, 19(4), 378-384. 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02096.x
  10. Rahim, M. A. (1983). A measure of styles of handling interpersonal conflict. AMJ, 26(2), 368-376. 10.2307/255985
  11. De Dreu, C. K. W., Evers, A., Beersma, B., Kluwer, E. S., & Nauta, A. (2001). A theory-based measure of conflict management strategies in the workplace. JOB, 22(6), 645-668. 10.1002/job.107
  12. Fisher, R., & Ury, W. (1981). Getting to Yes. Houghton Mifflin (ouvrage).
  13. Behfar, K. J., Mannix, E. A., Peterson, R. S., & Trochim, W. M. K. (2011). Conflict in small groups: The meaning and consequences of process conflict. Small Group Research, 42(2), 127-176. 10.1177/1046496410389194
  14. Davis, M. H. (1983). Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach. JPSP, 44(1), 113-126. 10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.113
The foundations shared by all our programmes (20 references)

The mechanics of our sessions: team play, the debrief, the before-and-after measure, spaced reminders.

  1. Klein, C., DiazGranados, D., Salas, E., et al. (2009). Does team building work? Small Group Research, 40(2), 181-222. 10.1177/1046496408328821
  2. Salas, E., DiazGranados, D., Klein, C., et al. (2008). Does team training improve team performance? A meta-analysis. Human Factors, 50(6), 903-933. 10.1518/001872008X375009
  3. McEwan, D., Ruissen, G. R., Eys, M. A., Zumbo, B. D., & Beauchamp, M. R. (2017). The effectiveness of teamwork training on teamwork behaviors and team performance. PLoS ONE, 12(1), e0169604. 10.1371/journal.pone.0169604
  4. Tannenbaum, S. I., & Cerasoli, C. P. (2013). Do team and individual debriefs enhance performance? A meta-analysis. Human Factors, 55(1), 231-245. 10.1177/0018720812448394
  5. Blume, B. D., Ford, J. K., Baldwin, T. T., & Huang, J. L. (2010). Transfer of training: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Management, 36(4), 1065-1105. 10.1177/0149206309352880
  6. Gollwitzer, P. M., & Sheeran, P. (2006). Implementation intentions and goal achievement: A meta-analysis. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 69-119. 10.1016/S0065-2601(06)38002-1
  7. Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). Test-enhanced learning. Psychological Science, 17(3), 249-255. 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01693.x
  8. Cepeda, N. J., et al. (2006). Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks. Psychological Bulletin, 132(3), 354-380. 10.1037/0033-2909.132.3.354
  9. Howard, G. S. (1980). Response-shift bias. Evaluation Review, 4(1), 93-106. 10.1177/0193841X8000400105
  10. Stasser, G., & Titus, W. (1985). Pooling of unshared information in group decision making. JPSP, 48(6), 1467-1478. 10.1037/0022-3514.48.6.1467
  11. Mesmer-Magnus, J. R., & DeChurch, L. A. (2009). Information sharing and team performance: A meta-analysis. JAP, 94(2), 535-546. 10.1037/a0013773
  12. Prentice, D. A., & Miller, D. T. (1993). Pluralistic ignorance and alcohol use on campus. JPSP, 64(2), 243-256. 10.1037/0022-3514.64.2.243
  13. Aronson, E., et al. (1978). The Jigsaw Classroom. Sage (ouvrage).
  14. Galton, F. (1907). Vox populi. Nature, 75, 450-451. 10.1038/075450a0
  15. Kahneman, D., Fredrickson, B. L., Schreiber, C. A., & Redelmeier, D. A. (1993). When more pain is preferred to less: Adding a better end. Psychological Science, 4(6), 401-405. 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1993.tb00589.x
  16. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Prentice Hall (ouvrage).
  17. Sitzmann, T. (2011). A meta-analytic examination of the instructional effectiveness of computer-based simulation games. Personnel Psychology, 64(2), 489-528. 10.1111/j.1744-6570.2011.01190.x
  18. Lichtenstein, S., Fischhoff, B., & Phillips, L. D. (1982). Calibration of probabilities: The state of the art to 1980. In D. Kahneman, P. Slovic & A. Tversky (dir.), Judgment under Uncertainty, 306-334. Cambridge University Press (ouvrage).
  19. Surowiecki, J. (2004). The Wisdom of Crowds. Doubleday (ouvrage).
  20. Butler, A. C., & Roediger, H. L. (2008). Feedback enhances the positive effects and reduces the negative effects of multiple-choice testing. Memory & Cognition, 36(3), 604-616. 10.3758/MC.36.3.604

Before you book

What is digital team building?

A team building session in which teams play challenges on participants' phones while a big screen shows the running order, the scores and the cinematic sequences. A facilitator runs the room from start to finish. Everything happens in person.

Do we need to install an app?

No. Participants scan a QR code and play in their phone's browser. No account, no password, no installation. It works on iPhone and Android.

Is there a limit on the number of participants?

No. The platform adapts to your headcount, from a small team to the whole company, in one or several rooms.

Demo

See “Resolve conflicts” in action.

Thirty minutes on your premises. You play a challenge and see the report at the end.

Request a demo