As a professional in any job, personal problems should not be a case in the workplace, however, it happens all the time. It is unavoidable. A project manager should acknowledge the fact that there is a conflict within the team and consider their respective point of view.  So that way steps to resolve it could take place. They don't have to report to each other or be dependent on each other’s work. They need to report only to the project manager so he can make the final decision. If need be, maybe they can reach HR to fix their differences.  If the conflict has not been resolved, we might need to change their roles or get assistance from the whole team so we can harmoniously run the project. Hence, the project doesn't get affected.

@vv48 I agree but I want to add more to level of professionalism. These issues should be recorded or at least be in writing. Privacy should be significant as well. So when management considers how to solve the issue, there is a paper trail of these issues that can be used as evidence.

@gg382 Being impartial is being professional. A project manager should always understand how valuable their team member is whether their personal issues outweigh a team member's usefulness. As unfortunate as this may be, a project manager may not kick out the troublesome members but instead the victim because the troublesome member may be significantly better at their job. This is where many project managers struggle. It's both professional to fire a person who is causing personal team issues but also to fire the worse worker. This is a challenge where a paper trail and significant analysis on past performance must be used to carefully judge who should stay on the team. If it's a matter of being incompatible, then alternative reallocations should be considered in advance. For instance, if it's easy to transition one member of the conflict away to another team even if it's not that members fault, then it might be a valid decision to do so.

@vv48 is correct and unfortunately, personal conflict between team members can occur. The project manager should definitely remain impartial, but she/he needs to accept that conflict is occurring in order to manage the situation. Simply ignoring the presence of the conflict within the team will do more harm than good in the outcome of the project because as tensions continue to rise, work quality diminishes. To begin with, prior to the initiation of the conflict, the project manager must practice comfortable and positive communication within the project team to avoid clashes due to differing opinions. Once the conflict begins, I again agree with @vv48 that project managers must listen to both sides of the story before making a decision on what to do. These decisions can be to either withdraw/avoid the issue, accommodate areas of agreement between conflicting members, make a compromise to please both members, or be direct and exercise power. The decision of the project manager will vary depending on the severity of the conflict. @wk46 I don’t think firing a team member or moving them to a different project should be one of the first options of a project manager. This should only be the case if that member makes the conflict more violent or is not willing to make any changes, ultimately affecting the project success. To avoid any type of conflict, what do you think project managers should do to create a safe work environment?

As others have mentioned, although personal issues should not be dragged into the workplace, it is inevitable that it will happen. When these issues are brought to work, it can result in a decrease in productivity and in the quality of the work. The project manager should attempt to address these issues as soon as it is brought to their attention. The first step would be to meet with all of the affected parties and to hear out their perspectives. The project manager should be supportive but should also be fair. From this, an assessment should be made on how to address the conflict. Additionally, how often they work together would determine the type of decision that would be made. For example, if two people are working at a medical device company, within two different departments, and do not have to interact fairly often, a decision does not need to be made as quickly. If they are working in the same department, however, and have to interact daily, the project manager would be forced to make a decision sooner rather than later. The project manager should also have a meeting with all of the involved parties and allow them to share their perspectives with one another while remaining unbiased. If the manager deems that the issue can be resolved, the members should be given time before having another meeting to see if there is any progress. If the manager deems that the issue is passed a resolution and continues to have a negative impact on the project, changes in personnel should be considered.

This is unfortunately something I've had to deal with at all my workplaces since I was 16. :(. 

Anyways, the point is people are fickle and oftentimes have hard times dealing with one another. There can be issues that shouldn't be dealt with by a PM, and left to HR. While others can be figured out within the team. In this case I assume we are talking about the latter. Oftentimes resentment can build when a team member feels they are being treated unfairly, or their voices are going unheard. I would always seek to make time in the project schedule to have periodic team meetings to address things like this. If the team is not meshing well, deadlines will be missed. Addressing issues like this ASAP should be a priority as to minimize ill will between team members. We all just want to get paid at the end of the day.

I agree with what previous commenters have mentioned in their responses especially how @jh597 emphasized that any problem occurring between two workers in the same company/team needs to be addressed immediately. As they mentioned, if the issue is not addressed and resolved in a swift and efficient manner, it could cause a ripple effect and start affecting others around them which could divert the focus of the team's attention from the task or project at hand to whatever the issue/problem may be. I have personally experienced issues in the laboratory that I work in amongst individuals who shared a difference in opinion on how to handle a situation that occurred in the lab. This difference cause a rift amongst the individuals and they began to talk poorly of the other person with other personnel in the lab when they were not around. This resulted in stress throughout everyone working in the lab and a non productive work environment for all. To resolve this issue a meeting was called with the two individuals who had a problem with each other and both individuals were able to express where their frustrations with the other were coming from. At the end of the day it was a misunderstanding on both sides' parts and it was immediately resolved. Not all office issues may be easily resolved as this one was, and its important that when any type of mediation takes place that both sides are equally heard and given the opportunity to express how they feel. It is crucial for a workplace to foster positivity, creativity, and freedom to allow for its workers to perform to the best of their abilities.

I agree with @hmara that people are fickle and that personal problems within a team can result in missed deadlines. At my place of employment I have had managers who handle these types of problems well. I had one manager that I feel like is a good template to follow if one is a project manager. One instance where I've had dealt with a difficult team member, once tension was sensed my manager addressed this problem immediately. First he pulled me to the side (since I've been at the company longer at the time) and ask what my problem with this person was, after explaining that I felt that this person was not pulling their weight or was actively trying to do less work. He listened to my side then had a separate conversation with this person and got his side. He figured out the source of the problem then lets us be for a bit and investigated. After some investigating he actually sided with me, due to the fact that this person was complained about from other members of the team. The solution that was ultimately implemented was that he had a separate, private conversation with him and have not had issues since. But also since this case had an underperforming member, additional training/coaching was done to this worker and going forward no one else had issues with this person. Feel like that is a good example of conflict resolution from a managerial point that can be applied to project managers. 

As a project manager, it would be important to emphasize that team members should stay professional in the office and that personal problems should stay outside of work. In the case where team members bring their personal issues with each other into work, it's important for the project manager to create an environment where people can be honest and they can share their concerns with each other, but also have boundaries. A project manager should also be impartial and should not take sides, but listen to both sides of the story and help them work it out between each other. The project manager should also help their team members focus on the task at hand instead of their personal issues. The project manager can also act as the mediator and should find an effective and beneficial solution that will help both team members, while also making sure that they are focused on the project. This mediation may involve sacrificing something and finding a compromise between both parties. It is challenging to be in a position of authority, especially when team members have personal issues with each other. Overall, a project manager should have open communication between team members, remain impartial, and ensure that everyone is focused on the project's goals while helping the team find a resolution.

A project manager must be able to lead the team and ensure each person is doing their necessary job to the best of their abilities. They must be able to have each person work well on their own as well as a unit. But in some cases it may be difficult for a team to run efficiently as a unit, there could be inner disagreements and issues with team members. In this case a project manager should remain neutral and allow each party to speak their part. The problem should be solved in the most effective and diplomatic way possible to be able to continue the project while also ensuring the members are validated and treated as people. 

As a project manager, it is crucial to handle situations where team members have personal problems with each other. The project manager needs to ensure that the team's productivity and project outcomes are not negatively affected by such situations. The first step in managing such situations is to listen to both sides involved in the dispute and try to understand their perspectives. It is important for the project manager to remain neutral and not take sides in personal issues. The focus should be on the problem and how it is affecting the project, rather than the individuals involved. Once the project manager has listened to both sides, the next step is to facilitate a discussion between the team members to find a solution. The project manager should encourage the team members to work together to find a resolution that works for both parties. It is important to set clear expectations for behavior and communication going forward, and ensure that both team members understand the expectations and agree to abide by them. After the discussion, the project manager should follow up with both team members to ensure that the issue has been resolved and that they are working well together. If necessary, the project manager can arrange for further discussions or mediation to resolve any remaining issues. By addressing personal issues between team members early and effectively, the project manager can maintain a positive team environment, leading to successful project outcomes.

My approach to a problem like this would to be to hear both sides of the issue, stay impartial, a figure out a solution or common ground that can be met. I would first call in each person or party individually to listen to their sides of the story. I would make sure each side feels like they are being heard and that their concerns and frustrations are being valued. While doing this I would stay impartial meaning I would avoid at all costs from picking one side over the other. I am not there to pick a side as a project manager, but to resolve the conflict between the two parties. Finally, I would take the information I got from the individual meetings and then find the best way that the two sides could reach a common ground or resolution. After this I would offer the solution to each party and follow up with them after some time to see how things are going. Overall, this may not always completely solve the problem, but finding ways where the project team can still progress despite conflict is the main concern. 

One of the most important aspects of project management is the resolution of conflicts between team members. There are many strategies a project manager can use in these situations. For example, it is important to encourage open communication within the team and foster a culture where team members address their issues early before they develop and negatively impact project progress. It is also very important for a project manager to remain neutral when resolving conflicts between team members. A project manager must base his decision to resolve a conflict on facts, evidence, and company policies. Furthermore, it is important as a project manager to listen very carefully to both parties involved in the conflict to understand their concerns and show empathy with them.

When working on a project, you are bound to encounter personalities among a wide variety and range that can be polar opposites or alike. As a project manager, your role would not to necessarily contain these personalities, but rather to focus them into completing a certain goal. In this case, being able to resolve human/personnel conflict is key because different clashing perspectives on an idea or suggestion is a hidden opportunity for compromise and understanding. Often times, clashes within a team can be solved with a formal sit down between the involved parties and a mediator to discuss what has occurred and to promote inclusive and constructive dialogue among them. Tactics would include complimenting both sides on key points that are aligned with the project's goals, creating compromises using both ideas that can generate ownership and responsibility in seeing its implementation, as well as remaining human and reminding each other that at the end of the day, we all work together and towards the same goal of success and happiness.

Maintaining team dynamics and professional relationships in the workplace is a reality of many project managers. The primary goal of a PM is to ensure that a project is progressing and this can be hindered when team members enter disagreements. Thus, the PM would need to step in and handle the situation as delicately as possible. While I can't speak for every PM, the PM that I worked under in my previous job always handled any team issues well. She would always speak with both parties independently so that she could get both sides of the story and then she would organize a joint meeting between relevant team members to discuss it face to face. She would serve as a mediator and allow the team members to solve the issue themselves. This helped us as team members understand one another more and solve our problems more effectively. I also really liked that she would serve as a mediator, rather than telling people who was right or wrong, because in most scenarios there usually wasn't a clear right vs wrong. So, this allowed the team members to solve problems themselves without our PM having to say someone was at fault and possibly causing more tension.