How to Effectively Manage Workplace Conflicts: TKI & IBR Models Explained

Conflict is a recurring reality in the workplace one that managers face more often than they realize. When people work together especially across roles, goals, and backgrounds disagreements are bound to arise. Whether it's about project ownership, communication styles, or leadership differences, friction is a natural part of team dynamics.

That's because organizations don't run on systems alone they run on people. And people bring their own values, expectations, personalities, and ways of working. When individuals collaborate toward shared goals but operate from different perspectives, tension isn't just likely it's part of the process.

The real challenge isn't the presence of conflict it's how it's handled. When left unresolved, even minor issues can escalate into deeper tensions and unspoken frustrations. Over time, these underlying issues quietly influence how people communicate, collaborate, and show up in their roles.

The data makes it impossible to ignore. According to a SHRM report, incivility is one of the most common causes of workplace conflict and it happens far more often than most realize. Over 208 million acts of incivility occur in workplaces every single day. Shocking, right? What's even more alarming is the cost: an estimated $2.1 billion lost annually, driven by reduced productivity, increased absenteeism, and the long-term impact of a disengaged workforce.

What's more telling is that 32% of workplace conflicts occur between different levels of management, not just among peers. That puts managers in a critical position not just to resolve conflict, but to influence how it's handled across their teams.

“As leaders, there are times when we are dealing with deep-seated conflicts some with families and others with teams. As a leader, there are times when it's up to me to either calm things down and bring the group towards common ground. How I do this can vary, but what's foundational is always taking a step back and gaining perspective at the balcony.”

Zab Vilayil

Administrator of Community & Culture

This blog isn't about preventing conflict altogether because conflict is inevitable. It's about helping managers like you navigate it with best practices, empathy, and authority. We'll explore two proven, research-backed models the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument and the Interest-Based Relational (IBR) Approach to help you turn conflict from a roadblock into a leadership opportunity.

Understanding Workplace Conflict and Its Types

Workplace conflict refers to a disagreement or clash between individual employees or groups, often arising from differences in opinions, goals, values, or working styles. It typically occurs when personal interests or perspectives come into tension with team objectives, shared responsibilities, or organizational priorities.

While conflict is a natural part of any team environment, it becomes a serious issue when managers fail to intervene effectively. According to the State of Conflict in the Workplace Report:

Poorly managed conflict can have significant consequences:

• 88% of employees observed low morale among those affected
• 55% experienced personal attacks
• 48% were victims of bullying
• 45% reported stress-related absences
• 23% chose to leave the organization
• 18% witnessed project failure due to unresolved conflict

The emotional impact on employees is just as serious:

• 77% of employees feel disengaged
• 53% experience stress tied directly to workplace tension
• 32% feel demotivated
• 28% report frustration or anger

But conflict isn’t inherently destructive. When managers handle it constructively, it can become a powerful catalyst for team growth and problem-solving. In fact, well-managed conflict has been shown to lead to:

• 57% improved working relationships
• 57% identification of underlying team or process issues
• 53% stronger understanding among colleagues
• 50% more effective problem-solving
• 40% increased trust within teams

Conflict management is a critical leadership competency one that directly impacts the success of any team, department, or organization. 

Types of Workplace Conflict:

Many workplace conflicts escalate not because they’re complex, but because they’re misunderstood from the outset. Identifying the nature of a conflict is the first step toward resolving it effectively let’s dive in.

1. Interpersonal Conflict

Interpersonal conflicts are becoming more frequent due to rising workplace pressure, global competition, and organizational disruptions like layoffs and restructuring. In fact, employees at companies that experienced layoffs or mass terminations reported 67% more acts of workplace incivility compared to those without such events.

2. Task-Related Conflicts

Task-related conflicts arise when there’s disagreement over how work should be done, who’s responsible, or what takes priority. These issues are especially common in collaborative environments 82% of U.S. firms with more than 100 employees rely on teams to accomplish work, making clarity in task ownership and expectations critical. While such conflicts can start as constructive debates, they often escalate into relationship conflict if not managed early and effectively.

3. Structural Conflicts

Structural conflicts arise from organizational issues like unclear reporting lines, rigid hierarchies, or misaligned workflows. They’re often triggered by lack of clarity in roles, unequal access to resources, or perceived power imbalances 47% of workplace conflicts are linked to abuse of power.

4. Value-Based Conflicts

Value-based conflicts occur when individuals hold fundamentally different beliefs, ethics, or cultural perspectives that clash in the workplace. Misunderstandings rooted in these differences can create tension, especially when organizations fail to create space for respectful integration. When not addressed with sensitivity, even reasonable disagreements can escalate into deep-rooted, emotionally charged conflict.

5. Role Conflicts

Role conflicts arise when responsibilities are unclear or when job roles overlap without proper coordination. These situations often stem from vague job descriptions or inconsistent communication from management with 70% of workplace conflicts traced back to a lack of role clarity. 

Now that we’ve explored the different types of workplace conflict and why addressing them matters, let’s get into the most effective approaches managers can use to navigate conflict with confidence and control.

The Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Model: 5 Strategies of Conflict Handling Mode

Developed in the 1970s by Dr. Kenneth Thomas and Dr. Ralph Kilmann, the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI) is one of the most widely used frameworks for assessing how individuals approach conflict in the workplace.

The model is built on two behavioral dimensions:

• Cooperativeness (plotted on the X-axis): The degree to which they try to satisfy the concerns of others
• Assertiveness (plotted on the Y-axis): The degree to which a person tries to satisfy their own concerns

By mapping behavior across these axes, the TKI identifies five distinct conflict-handling strategies:

Each strategy is best applied in specific situations, depending on the nature of the conflict and the manager’s intended outcome.

1. Competing (High Assertiveness, Low Cooperativeness):

The competing mode is all about standing your ground. It's assertive and uncooperative which means you're prioritizing your own goals over preserving harmony. At first glance, it might seem like this style doesn't belong in a collaborative work culture. But in certain moments, it's exactly what strong leadership looks like.

Imagine this: Two departments are debating a critical system change. One side keeps pushing a workaround that compromises security. As a manager, you know it's not up for negotiation you shut it down, clearly and firmly, because protecting company data outweighs consensus at that moment. That's competing in action.

This style is also valuable in emergencies or high-pressure calls where speed and authority matter more than discussion like enforcing safety protocols or addressing policy violations.

But here's the trade-off: used too often, the competing style damages trust. If you default to "my way or the highway," your team may stop speaking up, and creativity suffers.

Tip: Use it with intention when the risk is high, when you're protecting a value or non-negotiable standard, or when there simply isn't time to debate.

2. Collaborating (High Assertiveness, High Cooperativeness):

Collaborating is the ideal conflict-handling style when both assertiveness and cooperativeness are needed. It involves working together with the other person to fully address both parties' concerns, creating a solution that benefits everyone involved. In other words, it's not about choosing your side it's about finding a solution that works for both sides.

Example: Let's say you're a manager dealing with a performance issue. One of your employees is underperforming, and it's affecting the team's overall productivity. Instead of simply reprimanding or trying to "fix" them, collaboration means approaching the situation together. 

Sit down with your employee to understand their concerns, uncover possible underlying causes, and brainstorm solutions that work for both the employee and the team. Maybe they need more training or a shift in their role to feel more engaged. By working together, you create a solution that strengthens their performance and builds trust, improving not just the employee's results, but the team's cohesion too.

Collaboration is the ideal approach when both the goal and the relationship are equally important. It focuses on finding a solution that meets the needs of everyone involved. Although it requires more time and effort, the outcome is a win-win solution that not only resolves the conflict but also fosters stronger teamwork.

Tip: Use the collaborating style when resolving complex issues that require creativity and teamwork especially in areas like performance management, resource allocation, and improving inter-team dynamics.

3. Compromising (Moderate Assertiveness, Moderate Cooperativeness):

Compromising sits in the middle of the spectrum between assertiveness and cooperativeness. It's about finding a mutually acceptable solution that doesn't completely satisfy either party, but helps move things forward. Think of it as a way to settle on a middle ground when both sides are not going to get everything they want.

Compromising works well when you're dealing with issues where neither the goal nor the relationship is absolutely critical.

Let's say your team has been working on a product, and the deadline for finalizing the project keeps getting pushed back. One team member insists the product should be released in the next week, while another argues for an extra month to finalize features. 

In this case, compromising might involve setting a new, slightly extended deadline, but both parties have to give up part of their expectations. You're not fully meeting the team member who wants more time, but you're also not completely ignoring the urgency of the person wanting to launch the product quickly.

Compromising is not about winning or losing it's about finding a workable solution that helps everyone move forward. You can't always get everything you want, but by compromising, you maintain team harmony while making progress toward your goal.

Tip: Use the compromising style when you need to balance getting the task done with maintaining a positive relationship it’s ideal when both matter, but neither is the top priority.

4. Avoiding (Low Assertiveness, Low Cooperativeness):

Avoiding is a passive conflict-handling style where neither the individual’s nor the other party’s concerns are addressed. This could mean putting off a discussion, sidestepping an issue, or simply withdrawing from the situation. While it might seem like an easy way to maintain temporary peace, it leaves the issue unresolved and can cause more harm in the long run.

In certain situations, avoiding conflict can be a useful short-term strategy, especially when the issue is minor or doesn’t affect the larger goals of the team. 

However, in a workplace environment where goals and relationships matter, avoiding conflict too often can lead to unresolved issues that build over time. For instance, if team members regularly interrupt each other in meetings, ignoring them may cause resentment and hurt team dynamics. 

As a manager, the key to using avoiding effectively is knowing when the issue is too insignificant to address or when a cooling-off period is necessary before jumping into a solution. For larger, more impactful conflicts, avoiding is rarely the answer. 

Tip: Use the avoiding style when dealing with minor disagreements or when emotions are running high especially when a cooling-off period is needed before taking action.

5. Accommodating (Low Assertiveness, High Cooperativeness)

Accommodating is about putting the other person's needs ahead of your own. It's a cooperative but unassertive approach, where you give in to the other person's viewpoint or request. While this style can help preserve relationships, it often comes at the expense of your own goals or the team's overall objectives.

As a manager, you might choose to accommodate when maintaining peace or a positive relationship with a team member is more important than the specific outcome. For instance, if a colleague is dealing with a personal issue, you might accommodate their request to take on less work temporarily to support them.

However, overusing this style can lead to unresolved issues and build resentment. Say you're leading a project, and one team member frequently needs extra time to complete tasks. You accommodate them by pushing back deadlines, but over time, this delays the project, creating bottlenecks for the whole team. While this may solve the issue in the short term, it prevents the team from moving forward efficiently.

The real danger comes when you constantly support one person's needs while neglecting the rest of the team. If you're always accommodating one person's requests, it might feel like you're avoiding addressing other team members' concerns. This can undermine trust and hurt morale, as team members may feel that their needs are not being prioritized or heard.

Tip: As a manager, use the accommodating style selectively. While it helps in preserving relationships, it shouldn't become your default. Balance is key address concerns directly when needed and ensure fair treatment to maintain team morale and long-term harmony.

The Interest-Based Relational (IBR) Approach: Resolving Conflict Without Damaging Relationships

When conflict arises in the workplace, it’s common for the individuals involved to become entrenched in their positions, often leading to defensive or even aggressive behavior. This can escalate tensions and hinder productive conversations. The Interest-Based Relational (IBR) approach, developed by Roger Fisher and William Ury, offers a solution by focusing on preserving relationships while resolving conflicts constructively.

The IBR approach emphasizes separating people and their emotions from the problem. Instead of viewing the conflict as a battle where one side wins and the other loses, the focus is on building mutual respect and understanding between all parties involved. This collaborative approach encourages finding solutions that satisfy everyone’s interests, fostering a more cooperative and unified resolution.

At its core, the IBR approach helps ensure that all team members feel respected, understood, and valued, regardless of their differing opinions or goals. Promoting civil and mature conflict management creates a positive environment where conflicts are seen as opportunities for growth rather than sources of division.

The Interest-Based Relational Approach (IBR) revolves around key principles that help resolve conflicts. Here’s a quick breakdown:

1. Make the Relationship the Priority: Relationships matter most in conflict resolution. While addressing the issue is important, it’s essential to preserve and strengthen relationships throughout the process. As a manager, prioritize understanding and empathy during challenging conversations.

2. Keep People and Problems Separate: Avoid making the conflict personal. Instead of seeing the other person as the problem, focus on the issue at hand. This approach fosters constructive feedback and helps resolve issues without damaging relationships.

3. Pay Close Attention to the Interests That Are Being Presented: Listen first, then engage. Understand the underlying interests of both sides. Focus on resolving the issue by aligning interests, not positions, and work towards a solution that satisfies everyone involved.

“We have to excavate what’s under the conflict and bring it out into the open so that we can analyze, understand, and begin to resolve the human conflict that’s building on the top."

Liz Kislik

President of Liz Kislik Associates LLC

Now that we've covered the core principles, let's dive into the step-by-step process you can use to effectively resolve workplace conflicts using the IBR approach.

Step 1: Set the Scene

Setting the stage for conflict resolution is about creating an open and respectful environment. Begin by agreeing to the IBR approach with everyone involved and making sure that healthy discussion and negotiation will guide the process, rather than aggression. Clarify that the conflict is a mutual problem to solve, and both parties are presenting different perspectives. As a manager, it’s important to remain calm and ensure that both sides understand that the issue is separate from the person.

To avoid making the conflict personal, encourage active listening and reflective responses. Restate and paraphrase the other person’s concerns to show understanding, using assertive, not aggressive or submissive language. This helps separate the problem from the person, keeping the focus on the issue rather than on personal traits.

Step 2: Gather Information

The goal in this step is to uncover underlying interests, needs, and concerns. Start by listening actively and asking open-ended questions to understand the other person’s viewpoint. Acknowledge their emotions, and show that you respect their perspective, even if you don’t fully agree with it. Every conflict has its own story, so approach it with empathy and a willingness to understand the underlying motivations.

Separate the “performer” from the “performance” focus on the work-related issues, not the personalities involved. Consider how the conflict affects performance, teamwork, decision-making, and the overall organizational goals. Keep the conversation objective and avoid personalizing the issue. Use “I” statements to express your own concerns, such as “I feel” or “I think,” to keep the conversation focused on interests, not positions.

Step 3: Agree on the Problem

Once both sides have shared their perspectives, it’s time to agree on the problem you’re trying to solve. Recognize that different parties may have different perceptions of the issue, so understanding each side’s view is critical. If you can’t agree on the problem, aim to at least understand the other party’s perception of it.

As a manager, you must help facilitate mutual understanding of the conflict. This is essential before you move forward with brainstorming solutions. Acknowledge the differences in needs, interests, and goals, but ensure both parties are on the same page about what needs to be resolved.

Step 4: Brainstorm Possible Solutions

Once the problem is agreed upon, it’s time to brainstorm possible solutions. This is where creativity and collaboration shine. Encourage everyone involved to generate a wide range of potential solutions, without judging or narrowing options prematurely. Brainstorming for all possible solutions ensures that no idea is overlooked, and you open up the possibility of finding creative, mutually beneficial options.

Be mindful of Fisher and Ury’s recommendation to avoid defining the problem in win-lose terms. Focus on mutual gains, and search for options that align the parties’ interests or even make them complementary. Evaluate all ideas after brainstorming and start with the most promising proposals. This ensures that no one feels left out or forced into a corner.

Step 5: Negotiate a Solution

At this point, both sides should have a clearer understanding of each other’s perspectives and should have generated a variety of solutions. The goal now is to negotiate a solution that works for both parties. A win-win solution should be the objective, but in some cases, compromise may be necessary.

Use objective criteria to evaluate the options and ensure fairness. Ask both parties to agree on legitimate and practical standards, such as scientific findings, professional standards, or legal precedents. Ensure the criteria are something both sides are willing to agree to and be bound by. If an agreement seems difficult, shift the conversation from a battle of egos to a joint search for objective criteria that both parties can accept.

Throughout this process, remember the three guiding principles:

1. Be Calm
2. Be Patient
3. Show Respect

When to Use Which: Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI)  vs. Interest-Based Relational Approach (IBR)

Two popular conflict resolution approaches Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI) and Interest-Based Relational Approach (IBR) each have their strengths and ideal scenarios for use. Understanding when to use which approach can be the key to resolving conflicts effectively without damaging relationships.

Let’s compare the two approaches to understand when each is most appropriate:

Mistakes Managers Should Avoid While Handling Conflicts;

As a manager, navigating conflicts is a crucial skill. However, there are common pitfalls that can exacerbate situations and create long-term issues within your team. Being aware of these mistakes and understanding how to avoid them can help foster a more productive and positive work environment. Here are some key mistakes to watch out for and strategies to avoid them:

The teams with individuals who lack self-awareness make worse decisions and are less effective at conflict management.

1. Blaming Others

Blaming others is one of the quickest ways to escalate conflict. When you point fingers, it creates an environment where people feel attacked and misunderstood, leading to a breakdown in trust and cooperation. In the workplace, where teamwork is essential for success, a blaming attitude can leave everyone feeling defensive, which makes it harder to resolve the issue.

Instead of placing blame, focus on the problem at hand. Acknowledge that there might be multiple perspectives and that everyone involved has their part to play in the situation. By encouraging accountability without assigning blame, you can open the door for constructive conversations and solutions. For example, instead of saying, "You didn't do this right," try saying, "Let's work together to understand how we can approach this differently next time."

2. Failing to Listen

In many conflicts, people rush to defend their own positions without taking the time to fully understand the other party's perspective. This lack of listening creates frustration and leads to missed opportunities for resolution. If you're not truly listening, you miss the chance to understand the root cause of the issue, which can result in miscommunication and ineffective solutions.

Active listening is key. Make sure you're genuinely hearing what the other person is saying before you respond. Use techniques like paraphrasing or summarizing to show you understand their point of view. For instance, try saying, "I hear that you're saying X is a challenge. Can we explore that more?" This demonstrates empathy and opens up the conversation for more productive dialogue.

“And this is where good leadership and good human skills come into play, which is: Are you able to read the room and figure out what’s going on here? Are they having a bad day? Is there something else? Or is there something that I don’t know about the work that we’re doing that I can easily help address and fix?"

Simon Sinek

Founder of The Curve

3. Forcing a Solution

Sometimes, in the urgency to resolve a conflict, managers may feel pressured to push a solution without considering the needs and perspectives of all parties involved. Forcing a solution is a recipe for resentment and often leads to short-term fixes rather than long-term solutions. It can also lead to unresolved issues that may resurface later.

Conflict resolution is about collaboration, not winning or imposing solutions. As a manager, you should aim for a solution that works for everyone. Encourage your team members to share their views and ideas. When they feel heard, they're more likely to be committed to the solution. Use brainstorming sessions to generate options and work together toward a mutually beneficial solution. The goal is a win-win scenario, not simply a resolution that satisfies one side.

4. Failing to Separate People from the Problem

It's easy to get caught up in personal dynamics and start blaming the individual rather than addressing the problem itself. This can cause further tension and even damage relationships in the long run. The conflict becomes about the person, not the issue, making it harder to resolve.

As a manager, it's important to focus on the issue at hand, not the person involved. Keep the conversation about the behavior or situation, not the character of the person. For example, instead of saying, "You always mess this up," focus on the behavior: "The deadlines were missed; let's talk about how we can manage timelines better moving forward." This shift helps maintain respect and ensures the focus stays on finding a solution.

5. Ignoring Emotions

In any conflict, emotions can run high. Ignoring emotions or brushing them aside can make the situation worse. People are more likely to feel unheard and become more entrenched in their positions. Recognizing and addressing emotions, both your own and those of others, is crucial to managing the conflict effectively.

Acknowledge the emotions involved in the conflict, both yours and the other party's. This doesn't mean allowing emotions to control the situation but giving them space to be expressed and understood. For instance, saying, "I can see you're upset, and I want to understand why," allows the person to feel heard and valued. This approach creates an atmosphere of mutual respect and understanding, paving the way for resolution.

“One of the biggest mistakes you can make as a mediator is to jump right into a conflict when the emotions are high. Whenever possible, the best bet is to set a future date and time. When the emotions and energy can settle and deflate, giving you the opportunity to get ready for the conflict. And to start shifting positive energy into the mediation."

Dorothy Walker

Ph.D. PMP Sr. Project Manager

6. Failing to Communicate Clearly

Miscommunication is one of the biggest causes of workplace conflict. If expectations, roles, or feedback aren't communicated clearly, it can lead to confusion and frustration. Ambiguity creates opportunities for misunderstandings that can escalate into larger issues.

Clear, direct communication is essential. As a manager, ensure that everyone involved in the conflict understands the facts of the situation, the perspectives involved, and the goals of the conversation. Use "I" statements to express your thoughts without placing blame, and encourage the other party to do the same. For example, instead of saying, "You never meet expectations," say, "I feel concerned when deadlines aren't met because it impacts the team."

Case Study: Using the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI) to Improve Call Center Customer Satisfaction

This case study explores how conflict-handling styles influence customer satisfaction in a call center environment. It highlights the relationship between call center representatives' preferred conflict styles and customer satisfaction ratings, using the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI) to assess the conflict-handling preferences of 97 inbound call center reps. The study was conducted in a call center in the Pacific Northwest, where customer satisfaction was below the company’s average.

Challenge: The call center was achieving a customer satisfaction rate of only 77%, compared to the company's average of 80%. With customer satisfaction being crucial to the success of call centers, the company sought to improve these ratings. Previous research showed that an increase in satisfaction could lead to a 3 to 6 percent increase in annual revenue.

Solution: The company used the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI) to assess the call center representatives' preferred conflict-handling styles. By categorizing each representative’s style into one of five types competing, collaborating, compromising, avoiding, or accommodating the company aimed to analyze how these styles impacted customer satisfaction.

The main goal was to understand if there was a correlation between effective conflict management and higher Customer Perception and Satisfaction (CPS) scores. Representatives who exhibited collaborative or accommodating behaviors were expected to have better customer interactions, leading to higher satisfaction ratings.

To do this, the company compared each representative’s TKI results with their CPS ratings collected from customer feedback surveys. The research identified that those who employed more cooperative styles (like collaborating and accommodating) were more likely to achieve higher satisfaction scores. The findings suggested that managing conflict constructively could be key to improving customer relationships.

In response, the company integrated this insight into targeted training programs to help representatives develop better conflict resolution skills, particularly focusing on collaboration and accommodation strategies in customer interactions.

Results: The study found a significant correlation between customer satisfaction and the paired conflict-handling styles of accommodating and collaborating. About two-thirds of the representatives preferred the accommodating style, which focuses on satisfying the other person’s needs. Furthermore, reps who prioritized accommodating as their primary style, with collaborating as a secondary choice, had the highest CPS ratings.

Case Study: Using the Interest-Based Relational Approach (IBR) at General Hospital

General Hospital faced a serious conflict between its CEO, Mike Hammer, and the medical staff, particularly with the Medical Director, Dr. Mark Williams. Hammer aimed to reduce costs to save the institution, but the physicians strongly opposed his measures, fearing they would compromise medical standards.

Despite several failed attempts at communication, Hammer hired a new Chief Operating Officer (COO), Marge Harding, to address the issue and lead restructuring efforts. Harding, with a background in hospital administration, took a more direct approach, confronting the physicians about their resistance.

Conflict Resolution Approach: The hospital's management employed the Interest-Based Relational (IBR) approach, which focuses on preserving relationships while resolving conflicts constructively. The IBR approach involves understanding the underlying issues and addressing both personal interests and the problem at hand. It emphasizes collaborative conflict resolution rather than seeing the situation as a battle where one side wins and the other loses.

Steps Taken:

1. Preparation: Harding, instead of meeting with the physicians individually, decided to confront the issue head-on by addressing the larger institutional crisis. The aim was to ensure the conflict was recognized not as an individual problem but as a system-wide issue.
2. Clarification of Interests: Harding and the management team identified the core issues causing the physicians' resistance: their concern over compromised medical practices due to cost cuts. The hospital management focused on understanding the physicians' underlying interests and emotions before proposing any changes.
3. Engagement: A series of open meetings were planned to help physicians express their concerns and discuss potential solutions. By allowing physicians to voice their concerns, Harding ensured that the conflict was not personalized but was instead addressed as a matter of hospital policy and future sustainability.
4. Solution Development: Using IBR, the hospital leaders and physicians brainstormed possible ways to cut costs without affecting medical standards. Both sides worked to find solutions that aligned with their interests, such as reducing waste and improving operational efficiency while maintaining the quality of patient care.
5. Commitment to Long-Term Relationships: Throughout the conflict resolution process, the importance of maintaining professional relationships was emphasized. IBR ensured that all parties involved felt heard and respected, and that any decisions made would benefit the organization as a whole, preserving morale and fostering a more collaborative environment.

By applying the IBR approach, General Hospital was able to address the conflict between management and physicians effectively. Rather than letting the conflict escalate, the IBR method allowed for the identification of underlying issues, the protection of key relationships, and the development of solutions that satisfied both parties. This case exemplifies the value of the IBR approach in resolving conflicts in complex, high-stakes environments.

Conclusion

Conflict is an inevitable part of any workplace, but how you handle it can make all the difference. As a manager, developing conflict resolution skills is crucial not just for resolving issues, but also for fostering growth and collaboration within your team. With the right mindset and approach, conflict can become a powerful tool for team development.

The key to turning conflict into an opportunity lies in addressing the root causes and employing the right strategies. Whether utilizing the Thomas-Kilmann model or the Interest-Based Relational Approach, resolving conflicts with understanding and respect can drive both individual and team success. Recognizing that conflict can be a catalyst for positive change is what sets successful managers apart.

To build the necessary skills, effective corporate training programs are essential. Edstellar offers comprehensive training solutions that equip leaders with the tools to handle conflicts strategically. With proper guidance, managers can transform potential roadblocks into stepping stones for team growth, driving improved performance and better results.

Take the first step toward becoming a conflict-ready leader today. Explore Edstellar’s training solutions and the Skill Matrix, designed to help you build the competencies that will empower your team to thrive in any situation.