There are so many possible permutations of problems within a social group that is bound together in a close space; the military solves it with a strict hierarchy, the Buddha resorted to the Vinaya.
To resolve social problems within a group, it is generally important to have trusted people higher up in the hierarchy one can go back for advice (and for impartial mediation), and as much communication between members as possible (preferrably in fixed intervals, to give those events structure).
This is how Ajahn Chah sorted those issues (according to 'Stillness Flowing')... niggling and conflicts between monks was not unusual it seems:
p. 668
The first time householders listened to Luang Por give a Dhamma talk or went to ask him for advice, they were usually surprised at the accuracy and penetration of his insights into family life. It seemed common sense to most people that the causes and conditions underlying family conflicts were specific to householders, and impenetrable to a monk who had never married or had the experience of raising a family himself.
But leading a large community over a period of many years allowed Luang Por to accumulate a great deal of understanding of the problems that can arise in human relationships. The kind of conflicts that arose in a monastery were not as far removed from those in a family as might be expected. Moreover, the wisdom that arises from cultivation of the Eightfold Path had given Luang Por a comprehensive knowledge of causality in its many modes, including an understanding of the relationships between mental states and behaviour – both destructive and constructive.
On one occasion, a visitor was bemoaning her lot and told Luang Por how lucky he was not to have a family, with all of the tangled problems that it entailed. He replied:
"I do have a family here in the monastery, and it’s a big one."
Of course there is always the pure theory, that monastics should indeed stand above small personality issues:
p. 544
On one such occasion, he [Ajahn Chah] began – as was his custom – by emphasizing the importance of living together in harmony, of how important it was that the foreign monks related to each other according to the conventions laid down in the Vinaya. He instructed them that, as a group of samaṇas, they should put behind them all consciousness of different skin colour, language and culture, and look on each other with kindness and respect, as companions in the Holy Life.
They should train themselves in speaking to each other mindfully:
If any problem comes up in the group, then speak about it in a skilful way: ‘I see it like this.’ ‘I feel like this.’ And then listen to what the other person has to say.
The Western monks should learn to listen with an open mind, both to the words of others and to their own thoughts. When a view or opinion arose in their mind, they should be aware of it as simply that – a view, an opinion – and remind themselves that, as yet, they did not, in fact, know whether it accurately reflected the truth of things.
The mind was the measure of the effectiveness of their practice. If they were experiencing mental suffering, that meant that they had deviated from the Dhamma and allowed craving to arise.
In community life, devotion to the Dhamma and Vinaya would dissolve all sense of conflict and bring a feeling of unity in diversity.
In reality, bringing geographical distance between conflicting parties is the true and tried method to go beyond unsurmountable personality clashes:
p. 473
Luang Por said that going by yourself [on tudong] can be lonely; going with a friend is good. Two is a good number. But if three or four go together, it’s too much, and it often leads to complications and turmoil ... He cautioned me about conflicts with fellow monks and advised me to be patient.
If you go with a group of five monks for more than a month or two, there’s usually only one or two left by the end.
The combination of tiredness and harsh surroundings gives rise to arguments about things like the route or the place to rest. Some monks can be forgetful; they leave things behind and have to go back for them, which annoys their friends. There are many problems, particularly with shortages of requisites.
This all reflects very much what others have already posted in this thread.
To my mind, the main tool the Buddha gave us to minimize social conflict situations is the fourth Precept. It is, at least for me, maybe the most difficult precept to observe, as it is an appellation to change our most deeply ingrained habits of getting to be right and having the last word: we humans are social animals and through speech, we often define our place in the overall hierarchy. Therefore, talking to others is often not just communication, but also a fight for position.
Maybe, therefore, this additional point made by Ajahn Chah: minimize actually talking with others, as it will rile up your mind:
p. 278
One succinct teaching that Luang Por’s disciples had drummed into them from the beginning of their monastic life and came to sum up the values of Wat Pah Pong was:
"Eat little. Sleep little. Talk little. Practise a lot."
The dangers of gossip and frivolous speech crop up, either directly or indirectly, in a number of the Sangha Regulations. Luang Por maintained that practice would only really develop when monks were ready to face up to suffering and learn from it. Idle conversation was a prime means by which monks sought to suppress or distract themselves from suffering. That was not its only drawback. The topics of idle conversations stirred up the defilements of all involved. Socializing for frivolous purposes often led to dissension, and it undermined the harmony of the Sangha:
"Of all the detrimental activities that I’ve seen since I’ve been living in the forest, none is worse than monks gathering together for frivolous conversation. This has the most harmful results. But it’s also the thing that monks and novices find hardest to abstain from. It’s right here that things go wrong.
I don’t see it having any benefit: it damages your practice, your work. It’s unfitting and after it’s over it gives rise to remorse. There’s nothing good about it. This is where things have gone wrong in the past – right here. When you get together like this, then your speech becomes exaggerated, you start talking nonsense, laughing and teasing each other – all kinds of foolishness appear.
In a group, you start joking and playing around, then your mind becomes agitated. You don’t realize how loud your voice is because you have no self-awareness, you’re lost in the pleasure of it all."
The teaching is a lake with shores of ethics, unclouded, praised by the fine to the good.
There the knowledgeable go to bathe, and cross to the far shore without getting wet.
[SN 7.21]
