6 Myths About School Conflict

Mental models, conceptions of how the world works that we harbor in our minds, play an instrumental role in shaping behavior. A prime example is the mental model we carry about conflict. In previous articles, we described the corrosive impact of antagonistic environments on stress levels, relationships, and school reform initiatives. How leaders perceive divisive issues determines both the solutions they formulate and their likelihood of success. Fallacious mental models act like blinders that limit options: Once they’re recognized, leaders are able to extend the school community’s vision to include solutions previously viewed as impractical—or not considered at all.  

This article presents six prevalent myths about conflict in schools. Confronting each one will enable school leaders and their communities to address vexing, potentially divisive issues with a shared sense of purpose and a commitment to collaborative problem-solving. 

Myth 1: Schools Are Warm and Fuzzy Places to Work

We hear this one from friends, family, and neighbors: It must be wonderful spending your days in a nourishing environment with children, families, and educators. On one hand, the idyllic image possesses an element of truth. Yet schools are also rife with conflict, arguably never more so than today. Leaders spend 20–40 percent of their workday careening from one conflict to another, which likely contributes to the National Teacher and Principal Survey finding that 17.5 percent of school leaders concur with the statement, “The stress and disappointments with being a principal at this school aren’t really worth it.” The mismatch between myth and reality has also led to the exodus of principals and superintendents from their jobs. 

Myth 2: The Presence of Conflict Reflects Organizational Dysfunction

Conflict is inevitable in all groups, from families to international organizations. In almost any group, diverse and discordant values, interests, positions, and beliefs are present. We believe the problem occurs when organization members, including the leaders, buy into the myth that differences are dysfunctional. It stands to reason that if conflict is abnormal, it must be suppressed or avoided. 

We suggest a forthright approach. Accepting conflict as the norm, coupled with the conviction that “we’ll work it out,” nurtures school culture that values conversation until mutual understanding and agreement is achieved. 

Myth 3: If You Ignore Conflict, It Will Go Away

This might sound like a Captain Obvious statement, yet conflict avoidance is a pervasive leadership strategy in schools. Many leaders feel uncomfortable with conflict, which is certainly valid, because conflict indicates that the status quo is in peril. However, when you shrink from conflict, it doesn’t evaporate. Tensions fester, and the root causes continue to roil below the surface. We maintain that some of the most deep-seated and consequential ills that schools face today, such as institutional racism and economic inequity, persist because school leaders view them as being like Pandora’s box, a freight of troubles best left alone. 

Myth 4: Conflict Is Necessarily Destructive

We begin our workshops on conflict resolution by playing word association with the term conflict. Responses from audiences are universally negative: frustration, anger, divisive, factions... the list goes on. Patrick Lencioni, in The Five Dysfunctions of a Team: A Leadership Fable, refers to the “power of productive conflict” (emphasis added). By uncovering deep-seated issues, engaging a diverse set of stakeholders in open dialogue, and exploring a more expansive and creative range of solutions, we can channel initial disagreement into constructive outcomes. It’s the role of the school leader to reassure the school community, “It’s OK that we disagree. It will lead us to better solutions.”

Elsewhere we’ve described strategies that school leaders trained in “conflict agility” may employ to transform conflict into collaboration. With disparate views of stakeholders given voice, moving past rancor and fixed positions, a third way emerges. Initial differences reveal the path to innovative group problem-solving. 

The benefits of harnessing conflict extend beyond solving particular issues. The process fundamentally enhances school culture, elevating social capital and building capacity. As the school community gains experience in collaborative problem-solving, trust and confidence grows, together with an ability to confront increasingly complex challenges.  

Myth 5: Irrational Individuals Are the Crux of the Problem

Undoubtedly, emotional baggage prompts some conflict. As school leaders, we occasionally felt that parents and teachers carried their emotional baggage into our offices... and dropped it on our toes! However, most dissent arises from the array of values, interests, positions, and beliefs that any collection of humans hold.   

A cardinal principle of conflict resolution is to “separate the people from the problem” by focusing conversation on ideas. The simple phrase “That’s interesting, tell me more” in response to an opposing view gives the perspective credence, discourages defensiveness, and prompts continued discussion on an abstract, nonpersonal level. 

Blaming individuals also detracts from any kind of systemic approach to analyzing conflicts. A systemic approach examines factors in the organization and its environment, including inadequate staff development, poor channels of communication, vague or missing policies and processes, and the like. When fingers are pointed at individuals, powerful systemic forces leading to conflict are neglected... and remain in play. 

Myth 6: Leaders Are Intuitively Capable of Resolving Conflict

Conflict is rife in schools today because administrators get almost no training in conflict resolution. The topic is rarely incorporated in graduate-level course syllabi or administrators’ in-service training. We know this because we’ve polled audiences in presentations from coast to coast. 

Absent the necessary skills, it is no wonder that leaders skirt the issues, as we’ve written, or make missteps that exacerbate dissension. And yet, the fields of organizational psychology, political science, business, and peace studies have unearthed a wealth of content knowledge and effective strategies. To cite just a couple, there are Peter Coleman’s The Way Out: How to Overcome Toxic Polarization and our own From Conflict to Collaboration: A School Leader’s Guide to Unleashing Conflict’s Problem-Solving Power.

One of our favorite books on the leader’s role in conflict resolution is Mark Gerzon’s Leading Through Conflict: How Successful Leaders Transform Differences into Opportunities. We like the double entendre of the title because it implies two things. First, skillful leaders enable an organization to pass through a state of dissension to a more harmonious climate. And, when people work through differences, sources of dissension are surfaced, dialogue becomes honest and accepting, and novel solutions emerge. A school leader’s first step is to change the way people think about the problem by making them aware of the myths that limit our collective power.