Not all conflict is the same

I spoke about conflict on a pod recently and one thing I felt I did not address well was that not all conflict is the same, it depends heavily on the people involved and the context among other things. Also it was heavily implied, but not said explicitly, I was talking about conflict in the workplace, which is still a hot potato.

Conflict is often seen as something to be avoided, I spent years mastering how to avoid it until I realised I was actually making my life and other more difficult most of the time. Because in reality not all conflict is harmful. In fact, some forms of conflict are essential for progress, creativity, and creating strong, thriving working relationships. Susan Wheelans group development model and Bruce Tuckmans better known ‘forming, storming, norming, and performing, adjourning’ phases both have conflict as a second step that a team will and probably need to go through to truely understand each other and their behaviours.

To address conflict we need to understand there are different types of conflict, theres creative, personal, work-related and more, understanding the different flavours helps us when deciding whether to engage, navigate, or escalate the situation. Plus important factors like hierarchy, culture, peer pressure, race, gender, class, and sexual orientation and intersectionality further complicate these dynamics.

At the core of handling most conflicts well is psychological safety. If people don’t feel safe to speak up, even the best-intentioned conflict can turn into silent resentment seething and growing burning in your belly or performative agreement, that uncomfortable grinning grimace. As Amy Edmondson puts it:

“Psychological safety is not about being nice. It’s about giving candid feedback, openly admitting mistakes, and learning from each other.”

Teams and individuals need this kind of openness, without the fear of backlash, or getting a kicking when you are already down to have healthy disagreements. I heard this quote recently from Ambrose Bierce “Speak when you’re angry, and you will make the best speech you will ever regret.” this feels as important, pause, reflect, take a breath, because knowing when to engage in conflict is knowing how to approach it.

Reacting in the heat of the moment often escalates rather than resolves a conflict, I am a culprit of this in the past, put now when I feel that prickle of heat coming through I pause, if I can I go for a walk in fresh air before having the conversation, to be honest half the time I realise after my “calm time” it was not actually as bad as it felt in the moment and a quick conga does the trick. They were not lying when they told you to count to ten as a kid, works a treat.

Taking a pause before addressing an issue, whether in a crit, meeting, retro, feedback session, or an unexpected disagreement, can mean the difference between productive conversation and something you wish you could take back…. Which you cant

Creative Conflict: The one to run towards

Creative conflict is the friction that sparks innovation. It often happens when us lovely humans with different perspectives, skills, and experiences challenge each other’s ideas. This is where ideas thrive, the sparks should be fanned into flames but not into outof control temper infused fires. This kind of conflict is in a way vital in teams that value problem-solving, design thinking, user centred design and strategy. Disagreements over concepts, methods, or solutions, when handled respectfully, should and can lead to stronger outcomes.

Again psychological safety comes in, if team members feel secure in expressing dissenting views without fear of punishment, creative conflict becomes productive rather than toxic. Good creative conflict thrives in spaces where disagreement is encouraged, not seen as a threat. You may have noticed I love a triangle so I was always going to adore Patrick Lencioni, (The Five Dysfunctions of a Team Triangle and book)

“If we don’t trust one another, then we aren’t going to engage in open, constructive, ideological conflict. And we’ll just continue to preserve a sense of artificial harmony.”

Artificial harmony, where you nod along and agree just to keep the peace, but feel crap inside, it kills innovation, and a little bit of our creative souls IMO. If no one is disagreeing, it’s often a sign of fear, not alignment. Healthy teams create environments where debate isn’t just allowed but expected. If you do not debate, feedback, look from lots of angles and perspectives, listen actively to all the voices involved, that when bad ideas get released in the world, even dangerous ones…

Personal Conflict: The one to approach with caution

Personal conflict is trickier. It’s not about the work, it’s about messy complicated human emotions, personalities, and unspoken tensions. Sometimes it’s a simple misunderstanding that can be smoothed over with a direct conversation. Other times, it’s a long-brewing issue that keeps resurfacing, draining time and energy as Peter Bromber says “When we avoid difficult conversations, we trade short-term discomfort for long-term dysfunction.”

The challenge is knowing when to dig in and when to step back. If personal conflict starts impacting well-being, work performance, or team morale, it might require a helping hand, mediation or intervention. In my experience without psychological safety, people avoid addressing personal tensions directly, which only makes them worse.

Conflict expert Liane Davey points out “When you don’t deal with conflict in the open, you don’t actually reduce it. You just drive it underground.”

This underground bubbling conflict is like the river of slime bubbling under New York in Ghostbusters 2, it doesnt get calmer it starts to spread, gain power and infect those around it. Silent conflict is just as damaging as loud, explosive disagreements, it festers, it can lead to passive-aggressiveness, resentment, and disengagement. Addressing it early, with the right structures, keeps teams from going full slime.

Work Conflict: The one that depends on context

Work conflict often arises from power struggles, unclear expectations, or competing priorities. I think I have been in pickles where it’s a mix of all three. Some of these conflicts, like those over resource allocation or strategic or design direction, can be managed through negotiation, structured conversations or facilitated spaces surfacing the conflict in a constructive way. Others, particularly those involving unfair treatment, discrimination, or unethical behaviour, should be escalated appropriately, through appropriate lines of management, responsibility and HR.

And chuck in hierarchy and peer pressure this makes this even messier. Calling out a bad decision to a peer feels different than calling it out to your boss. And intersectionality, it shapes who gets heard in these conflicts and who gets labeled as ‘difficult’ for speaking up. As political scientist Deborah Tannen put well “The way we frame conflict depends on gender, culture, and power dynamics. What one person sees as healthy debate, another may perceive as aggression.” and as the amazing Kimberle Williams Crenshaw says “People with problems are not problem people.”

This is not an exhaustive list of conflict, but hopefully gives you the idea that its not all the same flavour. I want to touch on spaces as well as people and places are important, it can alter the conflict dance, again I only cover retros, but there are many other spaces to consider, just remember to keep them kind, keep them safe.

Safe Environments for Conflict: The role of retrospectives

So as we covered above not all conflict is destructive, and when managed well, it can lead to stronger teams, better decisions, and greater innovation. However, for conflict to be productive rather than harmful, it needs the right environment, one that encourages open discussion while maintaining psychological safety. Retrospectives (good ol retros) provide one such space particularly in agile teams, design practices, and leadership groups working in complex environments, but you can use the tools as individuals to reflect on the situation or as a facilitated trio if appropriate.

Why are retros a good space for healthy conflict

Structured reflection.. Retros create intentional time and space for constructive conversations and dialogue, they offer a neutral frame and space for discussing issues without them feeling like personal attacks (good facilitation is key).

Psychological Safety… In well-run retros, team members should feel safe to voice concerns, admit those pesky mistakes and failures, and challenge ideas without fear of blame or retaliation. By modeling openness leaders can play a role in setting this tone and ensuring all voices are heard.

Separation of people from problems… Retros focus on processes, outcomes, and collaboration rather than assigning blame. Using structured frameworks like “What went well? What could be improved?” or “liked, lacked learned” and always having the Prime Directive* singing through loud and clear helps keeps discussions constructive.

Encouraging diverse perspectives… Without a structured space like a retro, some voices might dominate while others go unheard due to hierarchy, loud voices, peer pressure etc. A good retro actively includes different perspectives, ensuring that quieter or less powerful voices have a chance to contribute.

Flipping conflict into action… Conflict without resolution mostly leads to frustration and disengagement. Retros aren’t just about airing grievances, they’re about turning conflict into actionable change.(They are also about celebrating the good stuff and learning, but we are not covering that today!) By the end of a retro, the team should have agreed-upon next steps that address underlying tensions and improve future collaboration. Talk it through, feel it and if appropriate learn then let it go.

When retros aren’t enough

While retros create a space for healthy conflict, like most things in life, they have limitations. Some conflicts, especially those related to discrimination, harassment, or toxic behaviour go beyond what a retro can address. In these cases, I repeat as above, escalation to leadership, HR, or external mediation may be/is necessary.

The bottom line

So to repeat where we started not all conflict is created equal, and avoiding it altogether isn’t the answer. The real skill is knowing which conflicts to engage with, how to navigate them, and when to step back or escalate.

Some conflicts fuel growth and better work. Some just make workplaces miserable. The trick is knowing the difference and creating the psychological safety that allows for open, lets work towards honest disagreement without fear.

As Gandhi said… “Honest disagreement is often a good sign of progress”

— — — — — — -

* The Prime Directive if you have not had the pleasure of hearing it
Regardless of what we discover, we must understand and truly believe that everyone did the best job he or she could, given what was known at the time, his or her skills and abilities, the resources available, and the situation at hand.

Norm Kerth, who wrote the first book on project retrospectives, came up with the phrase. However, it originates in Star Trek

Reading

https://ebrary.net/3071/management/wheelans_integrated_model_group_development
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/nov/12/kimberle-crenshaw-the-woman-who-revolutionised-feminism-and-landed-at-the-heart-of-the-culture-warshttps://www.mindtools.com/a6ooqev/lencionis-five-dysfunctions-of-a-team
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Five-Dysfunctions-Team-Leadership-Lencioni/dp/0787960756
https://amycedmondson.com/
https://lianedavey.com/