A constructive Approach to Managing Faculty Conflict: An Action Research Study

Second stage of the study. The first workshop was conducted at the end of January 2021. The participants were sent a Zoom link invitation by the researcher. Once

all participants logged into the Zoom room, the workshop began with a brief welcome and introduction of the co-facilitator and myself. The PowerPoint created by the researcher to guide the workshop included a review of the informed consent form, brief background of the implemented study, agenda of the workshop, research overview/data, workshop objectives/learning goals, introduction of the conflict resolution games, and questions to guide an open discussion on conflict between faculty and administrators.

To ensure the confidentiality and identity protection of all the participants in this study, in the first workshop before discussions began, the researcher assigned each participant with a number. Each participant changed their Zoom screen names to their numbers for easy recognition during discussions. Before speaking, each participant provided their number to further ensure anonymity in the discussions and in the convergence of the Zoom workshops from audio to transcripts only numbers would be in text.
Upon completion of the PowerPoint presentation reviewed, the researcher asked the co-facilitator to lead the group discussion regarding conflict in order for the researcher to move into the observational role and time-keeper for the 75-minute workshop. The group discussion lasted 25 minutes before the researcher broke the large group into two smaller groups for the breakout sessions. The researcher created two break-out rooms on Zoom and placed five participants in a group with the co-facilitator and five participants with the researcher. The time of each activity lasted 20 minutes and the researcher closely monitored the time to remain on schedule.
The first small group activity (appendix E) led by the co-facilitator titled, “Anything Goes”, engaged the participants in a mini-conflict in order to practice the skills of dialogue and build consensus in a non-threatening manner. The purpose of the

activity was to provide the essential difference between debate and dialogue in order to work towards shared understanding and strength and value in each other’s positions.

The second activity (see Appendix E) led by the researcher titled, “Positive Spin” involved the participants changing their perspective on conflict in the workplace by considering the positive aspects of conflict. The challenge was to define conflict without using negative terms. (Scannell, 2010).
After completion of the first workshop, the researcher sent the participants a post-survey to complete. The post-survey (see Appendix F) provided the researcher with information regarding workshop participation. Table 5 presents the quantitative data collected and analyzed from participation in the first workshop.