When You Say Yes but Mean No

We live in a culture--especially at work--that prefers harmony over discord, agreement over dissent, speed over deliberation. We often smile and nod to each other even though deep down we could not disagree more. Whether with colleagues, friends, or family members, the tendency to paper over differences rather than confront them is extremely common. We believe that the best thing to do to preserve our relationships and to ensure that our work gets done as expeditiously as possible is to silence conflict.

Let's face it, most bosses don't encourage us to share our differences. Indeed, many people are taught that loyal employees accept corporate values, policies, and decisions--never challenging or questioning them. If we want to hold on to our jobs and move up in our organizations, stifling conflict is the safest way to do it.

And it is not just with our bosses that we fear raising a dissenting opinion. We worry about what our peers and even our subordinates may think of us. We don't want to embarrass ourselves or create a bad impression. We don't want to lose others' respect or risk rejection.

We often associate conflict with its negative form--petty bickering, heated arguing, a bloody fight. But conflict can also be a source of creative energy; when handled constructively by both parties, differences can lead to a healthy and fruitful collaboration, creation, or construction of new knowledge or solutions. When we silence conflict, we avoid the possibility of negative conflict, but we also miss the potential for constructive conflict.

The act of silencing conflict may create the consequences we most dread. Tasks frequently take longer or never get done successfully, and silencing conflict over important issues with people for whom we care deeply can result in disrespect for, and devaluing of, those same people. Each time we silence conflict, we create an environment in which we're all the more likely to be silent next time. We get caught in a vicious "silent spiral," making the relationship progressively less safe, less satisfying, and less productive. Differences get glossed over, patched over, and suppressed . . . until disaster happens.

"Saying yes when you really mean no" is a problem that haunts organizations from start-ups to multi-nationals. It exists across industries, levels, and functions. And it's exacerbated by a down economy, when the fear of losing one's job is on everybody's mind and the idea of allowing conflict to surface or disagreeing with others seems particularly risky. All too often, the conversation at work bespeaks harmony and togetherness, even though passionate disagreements exist beneath the surface.

For more information, we will show some situation related to this topic.

In the organizer company which its core business is about organizing and managing event. There are problems before and during the event show. The problems before an event are preparation and coordination procedure, and it seems everything going very fast. At that time the conflict could extract between the owner and down line employee. The owner of the organizer always received orders directly from his clients before announcing to production or creative team. Under this condition, the owner or director of an organizer must follow Just in Time to satisfy clients while the quality of production or output responsible by employees. When the time left and production capacity are not matching, conflict might occurs.

As an employee in production team ,how are you going to cope this conflict? Focus on your duty or follow your boss rules? This is a complicated situation for everyone. It has not fixed