Resolutions
Improv is fun to do. A controversial take, I'm sure. It's playtime for many of us. It's also a serious craft for many of us. It can be both.
But in any collaborative/team endeavour, there are sure to be bumps. Humans are messy, social creatures each with our own foibles, needs, and challenges. And, inevitably, friction and conflict will occur.
I've been performing for over 25 years now but I've also been teaching and coaching now for nearly 20 of those years. I've had to learn how to create a space conducive to learning. I've had to learn how to manage and navigate conflict. Often, sadly, through failure. I helped run an improv theatre with little management experience and a conflict-avoidant nature. There are lessons I've learned through experience, training, and therapy that I wish I could send back in time to myself.
But I can't go back and give my former self all the advice I'd like. What I CAN do, however, is send them forward in time to you, dear reader.
So here are my tips and advice on navigating minor team conflicts as a coach and facilitator. They are not going to be perfect and universal, but I hope that someone who wants to help a group of people make funny voices on a stage finds them useful.
Caveat: I'm addressing topics like "This teammate always interrupts everyone in scenes" or "I get uncomfortable when we do bad foreign accents" or "I'm tired of always being endowed as the mom". For more serious issues between team members, as an improv coach you should be notified but hopefully the organisation (assuming there is one) running your team has mechanisms and practices in place for dealing with them. Stephen Davidson has a great article and flowchart that is illustrative for dealing with major issues.
Caveat, part 2: I'm not a therapist. I'm not a lawyer. All I have is my own experience. Use my advice at your own discretion.
Before facilitation
Ensure the aggrieved player is ok and ensure they want your help to mediate the issue. As the coach, sometimes the player (or team) is comfortable just speaking directly with the other person (or people). That's the ideal scenario. If a simple, direct conversation can resolve the issue, then that's a great sign.
But often that's not an option and the player (or team) is looking to you, as the authority figure, to resolve the conflict. You need to make sure they are ok with this process, they want to resolve this, and that they want to participate or not in the discussion. Sometimes, they will ask you to speak with the other party directly. Sometimes you just need to facilitate a meeting between two people, sometimes you need to meet as a group.
You can ask the person who brought the issue to you what they are comfortable with as an outcome or consequence as well. They might have suggestions that wouldn't have occurred to you. And you want to be sure that whatever solutions you propose works for them.
Check in with yourself
Before proceeding too far, you will want to check in with yourself to evaluate the situation. It's the exception rather than the rule but some minor complaints don't actually need or merit intervention.
As a coach, I also have to make a judgment. As an example, there may be a sensitive situation that we can easily avoid by removing a game, exercise, subject, and so on from the repertoire. If it seems at first glance like bringing the issue before another person might not be necessary, I try to talk the player through their experience and ensure that there is no reasonable, external action that will help them resolve the issue. And I'll do my best to offer solutions and tools that will empower them to handle or avoid the situation. This usually either resolves the issue or opens up further information that does require action.0
The priority is always making sure everyone feels heard and no harm is being done. But as is often the case, let's assume there is an issue that needs addressing.
If it's possible, do a quick check in with any of the other people implicated for their experience and perspective. There may be an innocent explanation or a misunderstanding. We all have our own biases and triggers and sometimes something innocuous can set us off.
Here is some seemingly unhelpful advice but it's easy to forget: all of this is totally your judgment. Each case, each dynamic, each relationship is unique. But a good rule to follow is that you want to respect the wishes of the person coming to you for help while ensuring everyone involved has a chance to remedy and repair the situation.
A group discussion
Ok, so let's assume there is an issue and an agreement that a group discussion is the best way to resolve the issue. That will often be the case. Clear, honest, open discussion within the group can go a long way to healing rather than letting issues fester and build resentment in private.
It takes a lot of bravery and trust for a player to approach a coach with a problem and that should also be acknowledged. It means the player has hope that this can be resolved, that you have the capacity to resolve it, and there is a desire to continue with the project. Otherwise, they'd simply walk away.
We want everyone to be able to sit in discomfort as we collectively work through this situation. Members of a group that are conflict avoidant will simply tolerate their own unhappiness rather than work through any issue (often for valid reasons in their history). The same person might respond to being confronted with their own difficult behaviour and take another person's discomfort as a personal attack if it's not clear that the behaviour and not the person is at issue. Again this reaction often emerges from their personal history.
We need courage, trust, and a willingness from all parties to confront the discomfort of a difficult but necessary conversation. And that especially includes, you, the coach.
So now what?
"We" rather than "I"
One key to keep in mind through the whole process is to frame problems as collective. Instead of "I think there's a problem," try "We think there's a problem." It is very important to make clear that this is the US vs THE PROBLEM, not this person vs that person.
We are not trying to fix or punish a person. We are trying to stop behaviour that isn't working for the group.
Behaviour and result
It is always the behaviour that is the issue. It's not the person that is the problem; we cannot control who we are. It is the behaviour that is the problem and we absolutely can build an awareness about how we behave and the impact it has on others.
So when we're talking about a problem within the group, we want to be clear that "When [behaviour] happens, it makes me/us feel [result]."
"When my offers are ignored, it makes me feel like no one respects me as a performer."
"When someone misgenders me, I feel very disrespected and unsafe. I can't do improv with people that I don't trust to take care of me."
If we can frame the problem in these terms, it becomes clear what the issue is and why we are trying to avoid it. Sometimes it can be tough to untangle but the more specific we can be here, the easier it is to identify and flag that behaviour in the future when we can clearly say what it is.
Assume goodwill and good intent
Mistakes happen. For a conflict to be truly resolved, we have to assume goodwill and good intent from all parties.
Start by assuming all parties involved will sincerely want to correct their behaviour, that they didn't intend to cause a problem. It will rapidly become obvious who is willing to resolve the conflict and who is more interested in remaining unchanged. Sadly, there's nothing an improv coach can do about the latter.
Humans are emotional
It's ok for people to get frustrated or defensive. But we want everyone to lead with kindness and care. It's ok to be upset by the behaviour. We don't want to be dismissive of what anyone is feeling. But we also don't want to attack people. Again, it's US vs THE PROBLEM. The goal is to resolve the conflict by discussing it, and change the behaviour.
Keep in mind that emotions aren't rational. You can't argue or litigate feelings away. They can be complicated but remain very real even if we don't always understand them. Sometimes even the person having them can't explain them.
This is a good place to underline: improv is therapeutic but it is not therapy. There are improv coaches who are indeed therapists, but odds are that yours isn't (I'm not!). And even if they are, that's not their job at the moment.
I'll talk more about the tools you can use to manage the energy in a meeting below.
The Discussion
The discussion should start with a clear outline of what the problem is. What is the behaviour at root of the issue? For some problems, you don't need to single people out and make them feel attacked.
You can phrase things as "We haven't always been good at using people's correct pronouns." And then you can offer the floor to the person or people who have had to deal with the result of that behaviour and let them explain the challenge for themselves, if they wish. Here it's good to remind everyone to focus on "I" statements, rather than "you" statements because they center the impact over intent. "We" statements are great for reinforcing collective agreements and outcomes.
If there really is one person repeatedly causing a problem for one other person, then it might be best to resolve it between those two. Again, you'll have to use your judgment as to whether you should mediate an issue as a group or between individuals.
You want to let people weigh in and share their experience and views. Let everyone have the opportunity to speak at least once before letting anyone speak twice. We want everyone to feel as though they have had a chance to be heard. It needs to be a conversation more than a lecture.
As a coach, you can and should direct traffic. That's your main function here. Don't let a collective discussion turn into a back and forth debate. And not everyone HAS to have a take on the situation. Explicitly say that. It's totally ok for someone to say, "I have nothing to add."
Let the discussion happen naturally and make sure people can finish their thoughts while being respectful of each others' time.
Time
These discussions can be lengthy, draining, and emotional. One thing you can do as coach is fix the amount of time for the discussion. Is it an hour? 30 minutes? 90 minutes? Unlimited (bad idea)? And you can limit the discussion to the issue at hand. Agree at the outset what we want to discuss, an agenda of sorts, and you'll be able to bring the conversation back should it wander off track.
If there's two main issues, and you have 40 minutes to talk about it, you can say you'll discuss each issue for 20 minutes. Then you can assign someone (preferably someone not directly involved, or yourself) to start a timer and give a warning at halfway, and when there's 5 minutes left. You certainly want to be moving towards closure with 5 minutes left. "We've got 5 minutes left in our allocated time, let's find how we want to resolve this."
As the coach, you can and should direct discussion with time in mind, always using your judgment and sensitivity. "We still need to hear from two other people so can you conclude your thoughts, please."
And when time is up to say, "Our allotted time is up for this issue, we still have the other one to discuss. Do we feel we want to spend more time here or is everyone comfortable moving to the next one?"
Four steps
It can be challenging for everyone when addressing behaviour that causes problems. Resolution gets much easier when we agree to the four steps of dealing with conflict:
- We acknowledge this behaviour is happening.
- We acknowledge this behaviour is producing the following result.
- These are the steps we will take to avoid/stop the behaviour.
- These are the consequences if the behaviour continues/repeats.
This can be tricky at each step.
Step One: We have to acknowledge the behaviour is happening. Bringing it to light and being able to discuss it openly and honestly is what gets us there. If someone is denying the behaviour is happening, that needs to be resolved.
Step Two: We have to acknowledge it's producing this result in the aggrieved party. We don't have to agree with it, but we do have to acknowledge it. An important point here is that intent has nothing to do with result. No one intends to have a car accident, but the result is undeniable and we have to deal with it.
"I didn't mean it that way." "They're being sensitive." "That's unreasonable." You cannot disagree with someone else's grievance and hope to continue as a team. If that's a dealbreaker, there is little hope of resolution. We require a deeper level of empathy, the ability to acknowledge someone else's feelings even if we don't feel them ourselves.
Again, emotions aren't always rational. We don't need to understand why something is happening, but we need to acknowledge that it is happening. The behaviour and the result are concrete and real. Going back to the flowchart, what we're looking for is empathy and remorse. Empathy is acknowledging the impact of the behaviour and distress the other person is feeling. Remorse can be a sincere apology or a promise to avoid the behaviour in the future. The ideal outcome and the best path to restoring trust is you get both but the bare minimum is the latter.
Remember, no one has to work with anyone they don't want to. Sometimes, that's the result. And that's ok.
Step Three: Be clear about what the expectations are in the future. "I think we can agree that this behaviour stops now. I'll call it out if I see it again." "Instead of doing X, let's try Y or Z." We want to encourage positive behaviour where possible.
Step Four: Keep in mind that this is meant to be a restorative process and not a punitive one. The goal is to collectively restore trust to the group. We want to avoid a resolution that will build resentment and further deteriorate things. (No one said this would be easy.)
Be clear about what the consequences are for failing to learn from this discussion and failing to alter the problematic behaviour, always depending on the scale of the problem.
"If this continues, you'll be asked to sit out a few practices/miss a show/be asked to leave the group."
As facilitator, you are seeking harmony on the team. Take the time to ensure the person who brought the issue forward is seeking a restoration of trust within the group and not purely a punishment.
If the broach of trust is irreparable, then none of this process applies. It's already too late.
Red flag
Letter of the law: if someone is probing for the exact and precise boundaries of the behaviour that is causing a problem, it may be a sincere examination of their ignorance. But it can also be someone far more concerned with the letter of the law and not the spirit. They may be looking for the boundary so that they can intentionally dance right up to it. That is unhelpful to say the least and you're likely to need further, more permanent action. Again, all of this is predicated on the assumption of goodwill and an intent to grow and change.
Prevention
You can often get ahead of these issues as a coach by providing a space for sharing people's feelings, thoughts, and needs by doing a check-in/check-out at the start/end of each session. Make it part of your workshop routine. Here's my speech when I start with a new group, feel free to use/adapt it:
"At the start of each workshop I like to check in with everyone for their access needs. Access needs are anything you want us to know to help you get the most out of today's workshop. It can be a physical need like, 'I need to sit down as I've recently had knee surgery.' It can be logistical, 'I need to step away for 10 minutes halfway through to make an important call.' It can be about subject matter, 'I recently went through a bad breakup so no break up scenes today, please.' Or anything else you feel we need to know so you can feel taken care of in today's workshop."
Even when working with groups regularly, providing this space at the start and end of each workshop gives people a chance to share small problems before they become big ones.
Aftercare
It can be good to check in with people individually afterwards to see how they're doing. It doesn't need to be elaborate, just a "How are you doing?" can suffice. Give everyone a chance to privately let you know how it went.
Sometimes the resolution leaves the complainant unhappy, sometimes it's the person who has been complained against. If you can thread the needle where everyone feels satisfied, congrats! But we're all flawed people trying to deal with other flawed people.
Beyond that, a resolution doesn't automatically repair the relationship. Emotions can linger beyond that moment. Trust takes time to repair and requires patience from all involved.
You're not a court of law, you're an improv teacher. Use the best tools you can muster for the problem at hand. If you don't know what that is, ask someone you trust. This work is challenging and demanding. Ask for help, especially if you work with an institution. You don't have to deal with conflict alone.
Conclusion
So there you have it, my three cents on conflict resolution as an improv coach.
As an additional resource, I've created a one-page PDF reference you can use with the info and the language I've shared here. It's meant to be a starting point and not the end point for this subject. I'll update it as needed.
I'm sure I missed things. I'm sure I can always improve my wording here. Text is a tough medium for delicate nuance but I'm open to feedback. You can always email me at hivinnyfrancois@gmail.com. And take care out there.
Acknowledgments
I'm very grateful to the feedback and contributions from Katie Pagnucco and Velvet Wells. Their knowledge, experience, and sensitivity added immensely to this resource. Photo by Christian Regg.