Two employees who normally work well together have stopped speaking directly to each other. One believes the other is constantly taking over their work. The other thinks their colleague is simply refusing to cooperate. Their manager has started receiving complaints from both sides.
There has been no dramatic confrontation. Instead, the conflict has developed through missed messages, assumptions, frustration and increasingly defensive conversations.
This is how many workplace disputes begin. No dramatic confrontation required.
Common triggers include misunderstandings, unclear responsibilities, different expectations, poor communication, competing priorities, differences in working styles, perceived unfairness and unresolved disagreements.
The most effective conflict resolution techniques help managers understand what is happening before attempting to decide who is right. The goal is to reduce unnecessary escalation, identify the underlying issue and establish a practical way forward.
The most effective conflict resolution techniques for managers include active listening, identifying the root cause, asking neutral questions, de-escalating emotional situations, clarifying expectations, separating people from the problem and agreeing on practical next steps. The best approach depends on the seriousness, cause and stage of the conflict.
What Is Conflict Resolution in the Workplace?
Conflict resolution is the process of addressing disagreement between people or groups and working towards a constructive outcome.
In a workplace, this might involve resolving a disagreement between two employees, addressing tension within a team, managing a difficult conversation between a manager and employee, or dealing with conflict involving a customer or stakeholder.
Conflict resolution is not the same as conflict management.
Conflict resolution focuses on addressing the underlying disagreement and reaching a workable outcome.
Conflict management is broader. It involves managing ongoing differences, so they do not become unnecessarily disruptive or harmful.
Conflict avoidance means deliberately staying away from the disagreement. While taking a short pause can sometimes be useful, consistently avoiding workplace conflict can allow problems to grow.
Mediation is a structured process in which a neutral person helps conflicting parties communicate and work towards an agreement. Managers should not assume they need to mediate every dispute themselves.
De-escalation is different again. Its immediate purpose is to reduce emotional intensity and prevent a difficult interaction from becoming worse. Resolution can come later.
Not every workplace disagreement requires formal intervention.
Many ordinary disagreements can be resolved through a respectful conversation. The concern is unmanaged or destructive conflict that continues to affect people, work or workplace safety.
At Preferred Training Networks, we see effective conflict resolution as an important management capability, particularly for leaders responsible for navigating difficult workplace conversations.
Understanding the cause of a disagreement is essential because the visible problem is not always the real problem.
Poor communication
Assumptions, unclear messages, poor listening and incomplete information can quickly cause friction.
For example, a manager may tell one employee that a deadline has changed but fail to communicate the change to another employee whose work depends on it. When the second employee discovers the change, they may interpret it as being deliberately excluded.
The resulting conflict appears interpersonal, but the original problem was communication. Sometimes, one email really could have saved everyone a lot of trouble.
Unclear roles and responsibilities
Role ambiguity is a particularly important source of workplace conflict.
When employees do not know who owns a task, who has decision making authority or which priority comes first, disagreements can become personal.
Safe Work Australia identifies lack of role clarity as a psychosocial hazard. It includes overlapping responsibilities, unclear reporting lines, conflicting expectations and unclear work priorities. These issues can contribute to mistakes, delays, duplicated work and arguments about who is responsible for what.
Managers can often prevent conflict by clarifying:
- Who is responsible for the task
- Who has decision-making authority
- What standard is expected
- Which deadline takes priority
- Who needs to be consulted
- How disagreements should be escalated
This connection between role clarity and conflict is also a key focus of the workplace training delivered by Preferred Training Networks.
Competing priorities
Two employees or departments may both believe their work is the most urgent.
For example, the sales team may need a proposal completed immediately for a customer while the finance team believes an internal reporting deadline must take priority.
Neither side necessarily has bad intentions. They simply have different objectives. And, of course, both think theirs is the urgent one.
A manager’s role is to make the priorities visible and establish which outcome takes the lead.
Personality and working-style differences
Personality differences do not automatically create conflict.
However, people can have very different communication and working styles. One employee may prefer short, direct messages while another expects detailed discussion before decisions are made.
Without clear expectations, those differences can be interpreted negatively.
Instead of assuming someone is “difficult”, managers should ask whether the team has agreed on how communication, decision-making and collaboration should work.
Performance and accountability issues
Resentment can develop when one employee believes another person is not contributing fairly.
A team member who regularly must correct another employee’s work may become frustrated. The other employee may feel unfairly criticised or micromanaged.
This type of conflict should not be treated as an interpersonal disagreement. Managers may need to address performance expectations, evidence, support, training and accountability separately from the relationship issue.
Organisational change
Restructures, new systems, new managers and changing responsibilities can all create uncertainty.
Employees may not know who they report to, whether their responsibilities have changed or how success will now be measured.
Poor change management can therefore create conditions in which ordinary disagreements become more frequent or more intense.
Perceived unfairness
Employees are more likely to become frustrated when they believe workplace decisions are unfair.
Examples include:
- Unequal workloads
- Inconsistent standards
- Perceived favouritism
- Unequal access to opportunities
- Decisions being made without explanation
- Different employees being held to different expectations
Managers should take these concerns seriously rather than assuming that the employee is simply being difficult.
1. Listen Before Trying to Solve the Problem
Managers often rush into solution mode.
Someone brings them a complaint, and the immediate instinct is to explain, defend, advise or decide what should happen next.
Instead, listen first. Easier said than done when you already have the answer ready.
A practical listening framework is:
- Let the person explain
- Avoid unnecessary interruption
- Ask clarifying questions
- Summarise what you heard
- Confirm whether you understood correctly
For example:
“So, your concern isn’t that the project changed. It’s that you weren’t told about the change until the deadline had already moved. Have I understood that correctly?”
This does not mean agreeing with the employee’s interpretation. It means demonstrating that you heard it.
Being heard can reduce defensiveness and give managers better information before they decide what action is appropriate.
Common mistake: Listen while mentally preparing your response instead of truly listening.
2. Identify the root cause of the conflict
One of the most important conflict resolution techniques is learning to distinguish symptoms from causes.
Consider the statement:
“They don’t communicate”
That is a description of the problem, not necessarily its cause.
Possible underlying causes include:
- The employees disagree about responsibilities
- They have competing priorities
- Previous feedback damaged trust
- One person believes the other is bypassing them.
- Decision-making authority has not been defined
- Feedback has been delivered poorly
- A process has changed without adequate communication
The manager should keep asking: What is driving this conflict?
This is also an important element of effective conflict resolution training. Preferred Training Networks’ conflict resolution program focuses on identifying the causes rather than simply responding to symptoms.
3. Use neutral, open-ended questions
Questions can help employees move from accusations towards facts and possible solutions.
Useful questions include:
- “What happened from your perspective?”
- “What do you think is driving this?”
- “What outcome would you like to see?”
- “What have you already tried?”
- “What would make working together easier?”
- “What do you think needs to change?”
The tone matters as much as the wording.
A manager who asks questions like a prosecutor can make an employee defensive. The purpose is not to interrogate people. It is to understand the situation.
Use open questions to explore, then summarise what you have heard before moving towards solutions.
Common mistake: Asking questions to prove a conclusion you have already reached.
4. Separate the Person from the Problem
Personal labels make workplace conflict harder to resolve.
Compare:
“You’re being difficult.”
with:
“We’re having difficulty agreeing on who owns this process.”
The second statement creates something that can be addressed.
Managers should focus on:
- Behaviour
- Impact
- Expectations
- Outcomes
For example:
“When the task is reassigned without the other team being informed, work is duplicated.”
This is more constructive than:
“You always interfere with other people’s work.”
The first describes behaviour and impact. The second attacks character.
5. Clarify Expectations and Responsibilities
A surprisingly large number of workplace disputes become easier once expectations are made explicit.
A useful framework is:
Who does what, by when, to what standard, with what authority?
It can prevent a lot of “I thought you were doing it” conversations.
Managers can use these questions when responsibilities overlap.
For example:
- Who owns the final decision?
- Who completes the task?
- Who provides input?
- What is the deadline?
- What happens if priorities change?
- Who needs to be informed?
Safe Work Australia recommends clear tasks, responsibilities, reporting lines, instructions and expectations as ways of controlling risks associated with lack of role clarity.
Clear responsibilities are therefore not simply a management convenience. They can also form part of a broader approach to managing psychosocial risks.
Common mistake: Assuming everyone understands a responsibility because it seems obvious to the manager.
6. Use Assertive Communication
Assertive communication sits between passive and aggressive communication.
Passive:
“It’s probably fine. Don’t worry about it.”
Aggressive:
“You always do this. Just follow the process.”
Assertive:
“When the process changes without the team being told, we end up duplicating work. From now on, let’s agree that changes are communicated before the task is reassigned.”
Assertiveness allows managers to be clear without becoming hostile.
It is particularly useful when setting boundaries, explaining expectations or addressing behaviour that needs to change.
Managers can strengthen this skill through practical communication training that covers active listening, workplace conversations, professional language and handling difficult interactions.
7. De-escalate Before Trying to Resolve
You cannot always resolve a disagreement while emotions are escalating.
De-escalation and resolution are related, but they are not the same thing.
De-escalation focuses on reducing emotional intensity and creating conditions in which a productive conversation can take place.
Practical steps include:
- Lowering your own emotional intensity
- Speaking slowly and clearly
- Avoiding provocative language
- Allowing the other person time to respond
- Moving the conversation to a private setting where appropriate
- Taking a break when necessary
- Setting clear behavioural boundaries
- Prioritising safety where aggression or threats are present
For example:
“I want to understand what has happened, but we need to have this conversation without shouting. Let’s take five minutes and continue when we’re both ready.”
Managers and frontline employees who regularly encounter difficult or emotional interactions can benefit from practical de-escalation techniques for difficult workplace situations.
Common mistake: Trying to “win” an argument when the immediate priority should be calming the situation.
8. Find Common Ground
Conflict often makes people focus on what separates them.
Managers can change the conversation by identifying a shared objective.
Instead of:
“You both disagree about the process.”
Try:
“You both want the project delivered on time. Let’s work backwards from that outcome.”
Common objectives might include:
- Providing good customer service
- Meeting a project deadline
- Maintaining quality standards
- Managing workload fairly
- Staying within budget
- Reducing errors
- Supporting the wider team
Finding common ground does not mean pretending the disagreement does not exist. It provides a reason for both sides to work towards a solution.
9. Agree on Specific Actions
“Let’s communicate better” is not a resolution. It sounds good, but what does it mean?
A useful agreement identifies:
- What will change
- Who is responsible
- When it will happen
- What happens if the issue reappears
- When the manager will check in
For example:
Vague agreement:
“We’ll try to work together better.”
Specific agreement:
“For the next four weeks, all changes to the shared project schedule will be discussed in the Monday planning meeting. Either person can flag urgent changes directly with the other.”
The second agreement creates observable behaviour.
That makes it much easier to determine whether the conflict has improved.
10. Follow Up After the Conflict
Resolving the conversation does not necessarily resolve the relationship.
Managers should follow up and ask:
- Has the behaviour changed?
- Is the agreed process working?
- Has resentment remained?
- Are new issues appearing?
- Does either person need further support?
- Has the original problem resolved?
A short follow-up conversation can prevent a resolved dispute from quietly returning a few weeks later.
It also communicates that conflict is taken seriously rather than being treated as an inconvenience that disappears once the initial conversation ends.
There is no single best technique for every workplace conflict. The right approach depends on the cause, seriousness and stage of the disagreement.
Situation | Recommended approach |
Minor misunderstanding | Clarification and active listening |
Communication breakdown | Open questions and structured conversation |
Role confusion | Clarify responsibilities and decision rights |
Emotional disagreement | De-escalation before resolution |
Repeated interpersonal conflict | Facilitated discussion and root-cause analysis |
Performance-related conflict | Evidence-based performance conversation |
Bullying or harassment concerns | Follow organisational policies and appropriate formal processes |
Threats or violence | Prioritise safety and follow relevant workplace procedures |
Managers should not assume they need to personally mediate every dispute.
Some situations require HR involvement, a formal investigation, specialist support or escalation under organisational procedures.
The more serious the behaviour or potential harm, the more important it becomes to follow the organisation’s policies and appropriate WHS processes rather than attempting an informal solution.
Managers can use the following practical framework when deciding what to do next.
Step 1: Understand
Gather each person’s perspective.
Establish what happened, what each person believes happened and what impact the situation is having.
Step 2: Stabilise
If emotions are elevated, reduce the intensity before attempting to resolve the underlying issue.
Set behavioural boundaries and create enough space for a constructive conversation.
Step 3: Diagnose
Identify the actual cause.
Ask whether the conflict is being driven by communication, role ambiguity, competing priorities, performance, trust, expectations, organisational change or another issue.
Step 4: Resolve
Agree on practical actions.
Define responsibilities, expectations, deadlines and behaviours rather than relying on vague promises to “work better together.”
Step 5: Review
Follow up.
Check whether the solution is working and whether further action is required.
Understand à Stabilise à Diagnose à Resolve à Review
This is a practical management framework rather than a formal or legally prescribed model. Its purpose is to give managers a simple sequence for thinking about workplace conflict before deciding what intervention is appropriate.
Practical frameworks like this are a key part of Preferred Training Networks’ approach to workplace learning, helping managers turn theory into actions they can use at work.
Resolving conflict between two employees
Start by understanding each person’s perspective separately where appropriate.
Look for the underlying cause rather than immediately bringing both people together. If the issue is suitable for an informal conversation, establish behavioural expectations, identify shared objectives and agree on specific actions.
If the conflict is serious, repeated or connected to a formal complaint, managers should follow the organisation’s relevant processes.
Managing conflict between a manager and employee
Power dynamics matter.
An employee may be reluctant to challenge their manager openly, while a manager may unintentionally assume that their position makes their interpretation correct.
Managers should therefore use evidence, clear expectations and fair processes. Where appropriate, HR or another independent person may need to be involved.
Managing conflict within a team
An individual disagreement may be a symptom of a wider team problem.
For example, if several employees are arguing about priorities, the issue may not be personality.
It may be that the team’s workload, responsibilities or decision-making processes are unclear.
In these cases, resolving the individual dispute without fixing the broader system may only provide a temporary solution.
Resolving conflict with a difficult customer
Customer conflict often requires a combination of listening, emotional control, assertive communication and de-escalation.
The employee should understand the customer’s concern without automatically agreeing with inappropriate demands.
Clear boundaries are also important.
Where customer-facing teams regularly encounter difficult or aggressive interactions, practical training can help employees respond consistently and safely.
Managing conflict during organisational change
Change creates uncertainty.
Managers should communicate what is changing, why it is changing, what is expected of employees and where responsibilities are moving.
Employees should also have opportunities to ask questions and raise concerns.
Clear communication and role clarity can prevent uncertainty from turning into interpersonal conflict.
Handling conflict in hybrid or remote teams
Remote work creates additional opportunities for misunderstanding.
A short written message can appear rude when the sender intended it to be efficient. Delayed responses can be interpreted as avoidance. Employees may also miss informal conversations where decisions are normally clarified.
Managers should consider:
- When to use written communication
- When a video or voice conversation is better
- How quickly employees should respond
- How decisions are documented
- Who needs to be included in important discussions
- How remote employees can raise concerns
The less context people have, the more important clear communication becomes.
Not every workplace conflict should be handled as an ordinary disagreement.
Managers need to recognise situations involving:
- Bullying
- Harassment
- Discrimination
- Threats
- Violence
- Serious psychological harm
- Repeated misconduct
- Formal complaints
- Safety concerns
Safe Work Australia identifies violence and aggression, bullying, harassment, and conflict or poor workplace relationships and interactions among common psychosocial hazards.
Psychosocial hazards can cause psychological or physical harm, particularly when exposure is severe, prolonged or frequent.
This does not mean every disagreement is a psychosocial hazard or that workplace conflict automatically causes mental health problems. It means organisations need to recognise when workplace interactions may create a risk that needs to be identified and controlled.
Managers should follow their organisation’s policies and seek appropriate HR, WHS or professional advice when a matter may require formal intervention. They should not attempt to investigate or resolve serious allegations outside their authority or expertise.
Unmanaged conflict can affect much more than the people directly involved.
It can contribute to:
- Reduced productivity
- Poorer employee relationships
- Lower engagement
- Absenteeism
- Staff turnover
- Reduced collaboration
- Communication breakdowns
- Poorer customer experiences
- Increased management time spent dealing with disputes
- Psychosocial risks
Conflict does not automatically produce these outcomes. However, persistent conflict and poor workplace relationships can become part of a broader workplace risk.
Safe Work Australia recognises conflict or poor workplace relationships and interactions as a psychosocial hazard, alongside factors such as lack of role clarity, poor organisational change management, bullying, harassment, and violence and aggression.
The implication for organisations is important: conflict should not only be viewed as an interpersonal problem. Sometimes it indicates that something about the way work is designed, managed or communicated needs attention.
Avoiding the problem
“Hopefully they’ll sort it out.”
Tempting? Yes. Reliable? Not always.
Sometimes people do resolve disagreements themselves. But when conflict is already affecting work or relationships, avoiding the issue can allow it to become more complicated.
Taking sides too early
Managers should gather information before deciding what happened.
An employee who makes the first complaint is not necessarily the person who is right.
Treating both people the same
Fairness does not always mean identical treatment.
Different employees may require different forms of support depending on their role, circumstances, behaviour and the nature of the issue.
Focusing on personalities
Calling someone “difficult”, “aggressive” or “uncooperative” does little to identify what needs to change.
Focus instead on behaviour, impact and expectations.
Trying to solve everything in one conversation
Some conflicts require several conversations.
Trust may take time to rebuild, and an agreed process may need to be tested before everyone knows whether it works.
Creating vague agreements
“Communicate better” is not an action plan.
Define what communication will look like, who is responsible and when the new approach begins.
Forgetting to follow up
A manager may believe the conflict is resolved while the employees continue to experience the same problem.
Follow-up is part of resolution, not an optional extra.
Managers are often expected to handle conflict without having received practical training in difficult conversations.
Structured training can help managers practise skills such as:
- Active listening
- Conflict analysis
- Difficult conversations
- De-escalation
- Emotional intelligence
- Problem-solving
- Root-cause analysis
- Stakeholder communication
- Assertive communication
- Structured resolution processes
For organisations that want to develop these capabilities across managers, supervisors or frontline teams, conflict resolution skills training can provide a structured way to build practical capability.
Preferred Training Networks’ conflict resolution program covers areas including the psychology and causes of conflict, role ambiguity, conflict frameworks, root-cause analysis, stakeholder relationships, difficult people and practical conflict-resolution strategies. The program can be tailored to Australian workplaces and delivered in-house or virtually.
For teams dealing with emotionally charged or difficult interactions, de-escalating conflict techniques can provide a complementary focus on reducing escalation, maintaining professionalism and communicating effectively during tense situations.
Training is not a substitute for good workplace systems or appropriate formal processes. Its value is in giving people the practical skills to recognise, manage and respond to conflict more effectively.
Building a Workplace Where Conflict Can Be Addressed Early
The strongest approach to workplace conflict is not simply teaching managers what to say when a dispute occurs.
Organisations can also reduce unnecessary conflict by creating systems that make problems easier to identify and address early.
This can include:
- Clear roles and responsibilities
- Consistent expectations
- Constructive feedback
- Psychological safety
- Accessible escalation processes
- Manager capability development
- Clear behavioural standards
- Regular team conversations
- Effective change communication
- Practical support for employees
Safe Work Australia recommends identifying, assessing, controlling and reviewing psychosocial risks. Clear responsibilities, reporting lines and expectations can be particularly important where lack of role clarity contributes to confusion or conflict.
The objective is not to create a workplace where nobody disagrees.
Healthy organisations can have disagreement, challenge ideas and hold different perspectives.
The objective is to create a workplace where disagreement can be addressed constructively before it becomes unnecessarily harmful or problematic.
Building these capabilities before conflict escalates is an important part of the management and leadership development delivered by Preferred Training.
What are the most effective conflict resolution techniques?
The most useful conflict resolution techniques for managers include active listening, root-cause analysis, neutral questioning, assertive communication, de-escalation, clarifying expectations and creating specific agreements. No single technique works in every situation. Managers should consider the cause, seriousness and stage of the conflict before deciding whether an informal conversation, facilitated discussion, HR involvement or another process is appropriate.
What is the best conflict resolution technique for managers?
There is no single best technique. Active listening is often a useful starting point because managers need to understand the situation before deciding what to do. From there, they may need to use root-cause analysis, neutral questioning, role clarification, assertive communication, de-escalation or structured intervention depending on the circumstances.
How do you resolve conflict between two employees?
A practical five-step approach is to understand each person’s perspective, stabilise the situation if emotions are high, diagnose the root cause, agree on specific actions and review the outcome. Managers should focus on behaviour, responsibilities and outcomes rather than personality. Serious complaints, bullying, harassment, threats or other policy-related concerns may require formal processes or HR involvement.
How can managers de-escalate workplace conflict?
Managers can de-escalate conflict by remaining calm, speaking clearly, avoiding provocative language, listening without unnecessary interruption, acknowledging concerns, setting behavioural boundaries and allowing people time to respond. Moving the discussion to a private setting or taking a short break may also help. If there is a threat to safety, managers should prioritise safety and follow the organisation’s relevant procedures.
What should a manager do if employees cannot resolve a conflict?
If employees cannot resolve a conflict through an appropriate informal discussion, the manager may need to provide more structured intervention. This could involve facilitated discussion, clearer expectations, additional support or escalation to HR. The appropriate response depends on the circumstances. Serious, repeated or policy-related matters should be handled according to organisational procedures rather than treated as an ordinary interpersonal disagreement.
What is the difference between conflict resolution and conflict management?
Conflict resolution aims to address a disagreement and reach a workable outcome. Conflict management is broader and involves managing ongoing differences, so they do not become unnecessarily disruptive or harmful. Conflict resolution may be one part of conflict management. De-escalation is different again: its immediate purpose is to reduce emotional intensity so that a productive conversation or resolution can occur.
When should HR become involved in workplace conflict?
HR involvement may be appropriate when conflict is serious, repeated, involves allegations of bullying, harassment or discrimination, creates significant workplace risk, results in a formal complaint or may require an investigation. Managers should also involve HR where organisational policy requires it. The exact process will depend on the organisation, the circumstances and applicable workplace requirements.
Can workplace conflict be a psychosocial hazard?
Yes. Safe Work Australia identifies conflict or poor workplace relationships and interactions as a psychosocial hazard. Other relevant hazards include lack of role clarity, poor organisational change management, bullying, harassment, and violence and aggression. Not every disagreement is automatically a psychosocial hazard. The risk depends on factors such as the nature, frequency, duration and severity of the exposure and its potential to cause harm.
The best conflict resolution technique is rarely a clever phrase.
It is a structured approach that helps managers understand what is happening, reduce unnecessary escalation, identify the underlying cause and establish what happens next.
A disagreement between two employees may be caused by communication. Another may be caused by unclear responsibilities. A third may require formal intervention rather than an informal conversation.
The manager’s job is not always to decide who is right.
It is to recognise what kind of problem they are dealing with, choose an appropriate response and create the conditions for a constructive outcome.
For organisations looking to build these capabilities across managers, supervisors or frontline teams, Preferred Training Networks provides tailored conflict resolution and de-escalation training for Australian workplaces.
