The Idea in Brief
- A peaceful, harmonious workplace can be the worst thing possible for a business. Research shows that the biggest predictor of poor company performance is complacency. Conflict can shake things up and boost your staff’s energy and creativity.
- Not everything is worth fighting over, however. Before girding for a battle, make sure it involves an issue that affects the future and has game-changing potential. And if your fight has a noble purpose—if it’s about, say, improving the lives of customers—that’s even better.
- It’s also critical to make the fight fair. Opponents should have an equal shot at winning.
- Leaders should structure fights through the formal organization but allow contestants to use informal connections. Good leaders also will help the losing parties turn their pain into opportunities for development.
The Idea in Practice
Body *
When Dick Fuld took over at Lehman Brothers in 1994, he inherited a contentious culture. Traders and investment bankers would not share ideas and competed for business, putting their own interests above the firm’s in nearly every instance. In Fuld’s own words, published in Knowledge@Wharton in 2007, “The early Lehman Brothers was a great example of how not to do it. It was all about me. My job. My people. Pay me.” But by the mid-1990s, the financial services industry had shifted toward an integrated sales model, and such blatant disregard for teamwork didn’t fly any longer. Fuld made unity and collaboration priorities at the firm, nudging them along with employee incentives. By the time of its collapse, in 2008, Lehman reportedly had one of the strongest cultures of teamwork and loyalty on Wall Street. As Fortune had noted in April 2006: “Fuld has incongruously turned Lehman into one of Wall Street’s most harmonious firms.”