Conflict management

01What is conflict management?

Conflict management is the planned handling of conflicts in a group or organisation: conflicts are recognised early, raised, clarified and turned into binding agreements. The term comes from the world of work and is used above all for teams, managers and companies. It applies just as much to clubs, schools and initiatives. The aim is not to prevent every dispute but to work through it so that cooperation can continue.

Conflict research describes a conflict as an incompatibility in thinking, feeling and wanting between people or groups. That is how the State Agency for Civic Education Baden-Württemberg sums it up in its issue on “Conflicts”, drawing on the conflict researcher Friedrich Glasl. A conflict is therefore more than a difference of opinion, because it touches what somebody wants or needs. From the outside this is often invisible, and some conflicts are never spoken about openly. A conflict felt by only one side therefore deserves attention too.

How conflicts are classified varies. A common short classification has four types: factual conflicts, relationship conflicts, value conflicts and distribution conflicts. More detailed accounts name five types, including the issue from the State Agency: conflicts over facts arising from missing or differently interpreted information, conflicts of interest, relationship conflicts, value conflicts and structural conflicts, for instance from unequally distributed resources or unequal power. For teams, the German Social Accident Insurance also names role conflicts and conflicts over goals.

The classification is not an end in itself. A conflict over facts can often be solved with better information, a distribution conflict needs a rule, a value conflict needs mutual recognition more than an agreement. Whoever knows which type is at hand is more likely to choose the right means. In practice the types mix, however, and a factual conflict left lying for a long time easily becomes a relationship conflict. A dispute about parking spaces is then soon no longer a dispute about parking spaces.

How a single dispute can be worked through step by step is the subject of the page on resolving conflicts in this series.

02How does conflict management work?

Conflict management usually works in five steps: recognise, raise, clarify, agree and follow up. Some accounts combine the last two and arrive at four steps, while the order stays the same. At the start is the perception that something is wrong, at the end an agreement whose observance is checked. In between lies the actual conversation, in which both sides set out their view. How long each step takes depends on the conflict: a small dispute is settled in one conversation, an entrenched one needs several meetings.

Recognising is harder than it sounds, because many conflicts are not fought out in the open. The German Social Accident Insurance describes an administrative team in which unclear roles and responsibilities lead to misunderstandings, resentment and anger. There it shows first in the work: mistakes pile up, and the atmosphere grows tense. Whoever takes such signs seriously can raise the issue before the fronts harden.

When raising and clarifying, tools that have their own pages on this platform help: active listening, I-messages and Nonviolent Communication. They make sure both sides are heard before solutions are discussed. For finding a solution, the Harvard method is suitable, as it asks about the interests behind the positions. Options are collected first and judged only afterwards.

The agreement should be concrete enough that it can later be checked whether it was kept: who does what by when. The issue from the State Agency names negotiation towards consensus or compromise as forms of settlement, alongside sets of rules, the courts and arbitration. A fixed date to follow up belongs to it, because only everyday work shows whether the solution holds. If it does not, the matter is clarified again instead of the conflict being quietly buried.

03When does a team need conflict management?

Conflict management is needed as soon as a conflict impairs cooperation or is likely to recur. Conflicts are part of working life, writes the German Social Accident Insurance; they become a problem when they persist and remain unresolved. Then they can escalate, cause stress, anger and anxiety, and in the long run affect health. The best moment is therefore early, while people are still talking about the matter.

Not every conflict calls for the same response. The model by Kenneth Thomas and Ralph Kilmann from 1974 distinguishes five conflict styles: competing, accommodating, avoiding, compromising and collaborating. They result from how strongly somebody pursues their own concerns and how far they respond to those of the other person. Each style has its place: with a trivial matter avoiding can be sensible, with a recurring question in the team collaborating is more likely to fit. It becomes difficult when one style turns into a habit, whatever the matter is.

Conflict management also has a place as prevention. As organisational measures, the accident insurance names a transparent allocation of tasks, regular team meetings, agreed guidelines for working together and rules for dealing with conflicts and mistakes. In addition there is training so that managers can recognise and moderate conflicts in good time, and communication training for all employees. The aim is a culture in which conflicts are raised early. Such measures do not prevent conflicts, but they make sure they do not grow in hiding.

Outside companies the same applies in a different form. For schools, the issue from the State Agency describes the idea of a conflict management system that goes beyond single measures such as peer mediation and involves the whole institution. In a club or an initiative, where nobody can give instructions, agreed rules carry an even larger share. Whoever agrees on them before a dispute arises does not have to invent them in the middle of one.

04Where are the limits of conflict management?

Conflict management reaches its limits where those involved can no longer work through the conflict themselves. That is often the case when a manager is a party to it or when trust in the team is used up. For such cases the accident insurance recommends having conflict conversations led by an uninvolved, neutral facilitator. Whoever mediates should have no role of their own in the conflict. That can be a person from another department or somebody from outside.

When nothing works internally any more, mediation is a procedure of its own. The German Mediation Act of 2012 describes it as a confidential and structured procedure in which the parties, with the help of mediators, voluntarily and on their own responsibility seek an amicable settlement. The State Agency also names its preconditions: violence is ruled out, the disputed question is negotiable, and the imbalance of power between the parties is not too great. Where these conditions are missing, other routes are needed.

A second limit is the degree of escalation. Friedrich Glasl described how conflicts escalate over several stages while those involved see fewer and fewer options for action. The further a conflict has advanced, the less a good conversation is enough, and the more likely it is that outside support is needed. That is why conflict management starts early and not only once things blow up.

Finally, conflict management replaces neither protection nor the law. Bullying, harassment, discrimination or violence are not a conflict between equals but a wrong that has to be stopped. For that, workplace contact persons, counselling services or legal routes are responsible. Value conflicts, too, can rarely be resolved by an agreement; here the task is rather to find a respectful way of living with the difference.

05How do you start with conflict management?

You can start with an honest stocktake: which conflicts exist in the team right now, including those nobody talks about? Often a look at recurring friction is enough, for instance over responsibilities, deadlines or the distribution of tasks. In its practical example the accident insurance names unclear roles and responsibilities as the cause, and that is exactly where to begin. A clearly organised allocation of tasks can forestall many a conflict.

The second step is a conversation that is not put off. A short, calm setting is enough: describe what was observed, ask how the other person sees it, and listen before answering. I-messages help to speak without reproach, and active listening shows that the other view has come across. The aim of the first conversation is not the solution but a shared picture of the problem.

For the team it is worth agreeing on rules for dealing with conflicts while things are calm. These include whom to approach when two people cannot agree, how quickly a conflict is put on the table and when a neutral person is brought in. Writing such rules down creates reliability. They should be reviewed in regular team meetings so that they do not disappear into a drawer.

And finally, examine your own habit. Whoever knows whether they tend to evade, give in or push through in conflicts can choose more deliberately instead of acting on reflex. The model of the five conflict styles offers a simple map for this. Nothing more is needed to begin with; the rest develops when a team actually works through its first conflicts together.