The following is my first draft of a scientific paper for my hypothesis; that we can resolve conflicts in workplace teams more effectively and efficiently by using AI powered technology to address minor spats or micro-conflicts before they have a chance to escalate into toxic conflicts.
Abstract:
This paper presents the SpatzAI framework, which addresses micro-conflicts in teams by promoting real-time intervention. By focusing on how conversational content is delivered, SpatzAI fosters healthier communication, enhancing team cohesion, collaboration and productivity. SpatzAI is designed to prevent minor psychosocial hazards from escalating, thus fostering more resilient, successful teams. A pilot implementation is planned to evaluate its efficacy in practice, with the aim of transforming workplace dynamics.
Introduction:
The journey of SpatzAI began as a deeply personal investigation into the purpose of conversation, spanning nearly 40 years. It all started with a simple yet profound question: What is conversation for? This question led to several key realizations, each building upon the other to form a framework for addressing interpersonal conflict in a healthier, more constructive way.
Background and Key Insights:
In the past five years, it became clear that conversation serves two fundamental purposes: to converge with one another or to convert the other person. Converging implies finding common ground, a mutual understanding, while converting implies trying to persuade someone to adopt your viewpoint. This distinction is central to understanding how conflicts arise and escalate.
During this exploration, I also realized that we could become more objective as individuals and as a team by objecting to the delivery of conversational content—particularly when we make this our shared objective. This insight led to a crucial differentiation between objecting and complaining. Objecting is real-time, direct, and addresses the way something is said, while complaining tends to occur after the fact, in a more indirect manner. Another key difference emerged between objecting and disagreeing: we disagree with the content, but we object to the manner in which it is delivered.
The SpatzAI Framework:
With these distinctions in mind, SpatzAI introduces a simple yet powerful method for preventing minor conflicts from escalating. When we sense that someone is unfairly attempting to convert us, we use a three-phase process to object: Caution, Objection, and Stop. This structure effectively pauses the conversation, allowing us to address and resolve the problematic behavior before it can cause further damage to team dynamics. Rather than letting these moments pass, only to harbor resentment or allow toxicity to build, the SpatzAI framework encourages us to slow down, address issues as they arise, and then continue the conversation with mutual respect restored.
We believe that taking the time to resolve minor spats in real time—addressing behavior that impedes productive and respectful dialogue—is a crucial step toward preventing larger, toxic conflicts from taking root. SpatzAI aims to transform how we manage micro-conflicts, ultimately fostering healthier, more resilient teams.
Literature Review:
Existing research on conflict resolution, conversation dynamics, and micro-conflict in teams highlights the importance of addressing issues early. The paper by Chan, Susannah B. F. Paletz, Christian D. Schunn. (2017) “The dynamics of micro-conflicts and uncertainty in successful and unsuccessful design teams” underscores how successful design teams manage micro-conflicts to reduce uncertainty and enhance collaboration, whereas unsuccessful teams let micro-conflicts increase uncertainty, impacting team performance. This aligns with SpatzAI’s goal: to resolve micro-conflicts in real-time and direct through a structured 3-step process, helping teams manage disagreements productively and maintain cohesion.
Methodology:
The development of the SpatzAI framework is rooted in 40 years of personal exploration. Over 50 journals, 800 blog posts on rethinkperfect.com and Object123.com, and one self-published book in 2012 titled Rethink Perfect: The Upside of Uncertainty and the Art of Moderating Our Own Disputes contribute to this foundation. After writing around 1.5 million words, I distilled three key words: Caution, Object, and Stop.
To test and refine this framework, I went into business with my younger brother Stephen some 20 years ago. This partnership provided a work environment to experiment with the ideas. Additionally, spending 20 years resolving an issue with my mum and experimenting with personal relationships helped me develop a formula for resolving conflict that could be applied broadly.
Conceptual Framework:
The solution I have found seems buried in the words themselves:
- Conversation: Converging or Converting
- Objectivity: By Objecting
Most people do not seem to know the differences between Objecting vs. Complaining and Disagreeing vs. Objecting. Let’s dive into both:
Objecting vs. Complaining: It is my firm belief that objecting is done in real-time and is more direct, whereas complaining is typically done after the fact and is more indirect—often involving malicious gossiping or venting.
Disagreeing vs. Objecting: We disagree with the content of a conversation but object to the behavior or delivery—how the content was delivered.
Putting this all together, we get SpatzAI. When we feel someone is unfairly trying to convert us with dogmatic rhetoric instead of engaging in fair and reasonable discussion, rather than complaining afterward to a confidant, we object to their behavior in real-time.
Signs of Converting: The signs to look out for when someone is trying to unfairly convert us is when they use absolute nudges to convert us like “absolutely”, “exactly”, “totally”, or “100%”, etc. etc. In my view these terms are unreasonable and would not stand up to scrutiny and are therefore are just noise rather than actual signals.
Also the lack of prefacing of their statements such as “I think…” or “To me…” etc. etc. indicate a converting tone. And finally, by avoiding rhetorical questions, in my view, will assist in us avoiding being cautioned during our conversations, “don’t you think…”, “why do you keep saying that…”.
Getting an agreement that these unfair nudging rhetoric should be avoided and can be cautioned on would be a good start for a collaborative and fruitful convergence rather than trying to convert each other.
Spatz Chat and AI At Work So, we then use the SpatzAI procedure, Chat app and Team-Assist Review platform to address when we feel we are being unfairly converted. It all starts with the team charter agreement for how we approach conversations. Once agreed to we can use a 0. Verbal Caution and if acknowledged we move on or if ignored or challenged we use the 3-step chat app, when convenient to address and start the documentation process, using the 1. Official Caution on the opening page. Once again, if acknowledged we move on or the objector can up the ante to 2. Official Objection, and if on simple apology is forthcoming, the objector can escalate to 3. Official Stop where an acceptable apology is now due and their conflict is automatically posted on their Slack or MS Team platform to be reviewed by their team and the Spatz AI. If still unresolved the team and AI can even take a vote and make a recommendation to management.
Implications:
By agreeing beforehand on the rules of engagement —avoid self-righteous use of absolute and dogmatic language and thinking—and addressing any spats early, when we infringe on these agree rules, we can nip in the bud any minor psychosocial hazards before they escalate into more toxic conflicts. Using SpatzAI, we aim to increase collaboration and teamwork substantially, and who knows—maybe the sky is the limit.
We intend to complete a pilot early 2025, using the Spatz Chat app and platform to demonstrate these concepts in the field with a workplace team. At the same time, the data collected over time can be valuable for the AI to learn from and eventually predict the potential for a team’s success or failure.
Conclusion:
The SpatzAI framework offers a practical and effective way to manage micro-conflicts, preventing them from escalating into toxic team dynamics. By emphasizing real-time intervention and focusing on the delivery of conversational content, SpatzAI promotes healthier communication and fosters collaboration. The pilot study will demonstrate how these principles work in practice, ultimately helping teams thrive by addressing minor issues before they grow. We believe that with SpatzAI, we can lay the foundation for more resilient and successful teams.
Object123 
Leave a comment