PrismTech is a tech start-up based in Melbourne. Although it is a new player and faces pressure to compete in a constantly evolving market, the company's success in new products, sales, and promotion are contributing to its growing profile. Anh, Lee, and Ali are three members of a six- person project team working in Product Development. They began experiencing increasing levels of conflict during the final stages of developing a new software product, due partly to the pressure of meeting a launch deadline.

As project manager, Anh supports collective decision-making and has a reputation for seeking solutions that satisfy project objectives and team members. They start each new project by emphasising the importance of open communication and are seen by team members to consider everyone's viewpoints. Prism employees who have worked with them in the past commented that"Anh does more than just say they collaborate; you actually see this all the time when they work with people."

Lee, the lead developer, is highly driven and focusses on results, and prioritises achieving project goals over team dynamics. In the drive to get the best outcome on any project she's working on, Lee often pushes her ideas assertively, sometimes overriding the opinions of other team members. "Does Lee listen?", said a former team member. "When it suits her agenda only! Usually, she directs the conversation to get to what she wants."

Ali, a junior developer, is the least experienced member of the team and prefers to avoid any confrontation. If there's a disagreement, he prefers to step back from the situation. He told a colleague over coffee recently that his approach is to hope that an issue can be resolved, without him needing to be involved.

The conflict escalated during a critical meeting to finalise the software's features. Lee proposed integrating a complex, cutting-edge addition. "This will take more time and resources but will make an incredible difference in the marketplace," she said emphatically, ignoring the fact this change would threaten the launch deadline. "It would be absolutely idiotic not to move forward with it!"

Anh recognised the potential of Lee's idea but being very aware of the deadline, called for a follow- up meeting and encouraged all team members to share opinions. Anh also led a brainstorming session to see how the feature could be incorporated without threatening the timeline. They then suggested a compromise: simplifying Lee's feature for the launch and introducing it fully in the product update. This meant Lee's innovation would be used and the looming launch date would be met.

Lee was frustrated her proposal wasn't fully adopted, arguing vigorously against the compromise. "What's the point of half-hearted innovation? If we go with this almost useless idea, we lose any long-term benefit and our competitive edge - not to mention the damage to our reputation. It's pointless!" This tone, and the inability to acknowledge alternatives or any of the concerns expressed, added to the tension. "Most of us felt our ideas were dismissed," a team member said to Anh later.

As the atmosphere in the meeting became more uncomfortable, Ali remained silent, hoping there would be a resolution. Even though he had an idea that would help, he avoided sharing his concept, so a potential solution was not considered. The conversation continued via email over the next two days. Away from the emotion of the meeting, more team members were prepared to express their opinion and most supported the compromise approach. Through Anh's efforts to find an shared solution, the team agreed on the phased strategy for the added feature; the basic version of Lee's idea would be added, with a plan for future enhancements at the next product update.

Using your understanding of conflict, and case evidence, evaluate the styles of dealing with conflict that are displayed by each of the three team members. Then explain how Anh could have used active listening to develop a more positive outcome involving Ali.