The Conflict Modes card in this section looks at the Thomas Kilmann framework. It positions five different modes of how people handle conflict. There are two dimensions when choosing a course of action in a conflict situation. Assertiveness is the degree to which you try to satisfy your own needs. Cooperativeness is the degree to which you try to satisfy the other person’s concerns.

It’s useful to understand the 5 conflict handling modes, as this can improve how you manage your own conflict situations, and how you help others to manage theirs.

It’s unrealistic to think that conflict can be avoided completely. Where there are people, there will be conflict. We’ve already stated that conflict can arise due to miscommunication and misunderstanding, therefore it’s important to be able to reduce this particular risk. We can mitigate the potential for communication based conflict by understanding how we communicate, and where the challenges may occur. We looked at this in the Meeting Communications section.

However, communication based conflict is not the only type of conflict that may occur in meetings. Here we’ll consider four other causes of conflict, all of which can be apparent in meetings.

This can occur when there is lack of clarity about what needs to be done, and why. It’s likely that the reason for the meeting is unclear, with its purpose, objectives, and outcomes being poorly defined, or completely absent.

People arrive in the meeting with different ideas, or no idea, about the reason for meeting, meaning time is taken up trying to get everyone on the same page. People become frustrated, they may argue, and the meeting leader loses credibility.

This can happen when there is confusion associated with roles, responsibilities, and resources. Participants are likely to be unsure of their meeting role and its associated responsibilities, and they may feel ill prepared to contribute.

There may be some competition between participants as roles get defined during the meeting rather than ahead of it. No-one will have had the chance to question their role or its responsibilities, meaning there may be a misalignment between what the meeting leader thinks an individual’s role and contribution will be, versus what that individual can contribute.

Time, as a resource, is wasted while things that should have been clear, and agreed before the meeting, are now dealt with in the meeting. Tempers become frayed and conflict arises.

This is when personal and emotional aspects cause conflict. This type of conflict may be due to differences in personalities, opinions, preferences, or styles.

Often, there isn’t a choice of who we need to work with, and that includes meetings. Sometimes we’ll have little in common with some meeting participants, we may even be totally incompatible, and yet we still have to work together. No real surprise then that conflict can occur.

This type of conflict can arise from a clash between people who have different moral or ethical standards, beliefs, or principles.

In value-based conflicts, individuals may feel so strongly about upholding their values that they will not entertain any trades that might satisfy other interests they may have. This type of conflict tends to make those involved highly defensive, and distrusting.

Purpose based conflict and process based conflict can be the result of poor meeting design. Participants aren’t clear about why the meeting is needed, or why they’ve been invited. They don’t know what they need to do to prepare, how they will take part, the contribution they will make, and what the likely next steps will be after the meeting.

Frustration is significant in its contribution to both purpose based conflict and to process based conflict. However, participants don’t necessarily take out their frustrations on the meeting leader, they may turn against others whose interpretation of what the meeting is for is different to their own.

Relationship-based conflict and value-based conflict are directly related to the people in the meeting, and while good meeting design won’t change relationships and values, it can create an environment that is conducive to cooperation. A well-designed meeting removes uncertainty, simplifies complexity, and eliminates ambiguity for everyone involved in the meeting. If it’s likely that the meeting may spark these types of conflict situations it may be best for the meeting leader to acknowledge this in the pre-meeting phase, and again at the start of the meeting. This gives people the opportunity to think about their own reactions, and also the reactions of others.

Knowing about, and being able to identify, the potential causes of conflict can help inform the best approach for addressing it, hopefully before the conflict escalates.

As a meeting leader, or facilitator, it’s necessary to look for signs of conflict. They can present in different ways, depending on the situation and the people involved in the meeting.

These are fairly easy to spot as they are audible. Listen out for, as example, arguing, complaining, criticism, and disparaging remarks.

These are easier to spot during in-person meetings, so be vigilant in remote and hybrid meetings. You may see eye-rolling, arm-crossing, frowning, and headshaking.

These are less easy to spot, at least early on. They can include behaviours that undermine the contribution of other participants, and that can lead to actions such as withdrawal, retraction, avoidance, and disengagement.

If a conflict situation arises in a meeting, as meeting leader, you need to decide how to deal with it. Whether you do it within the meeting, or outside of the meeting, the following approach may help.

Identify the source of the conflict by asking open-ended questions so that participants can share their feelings, perspectives, needs, and fears.

Practice active listening to hear both what is, and what isn’t, being said.

Use the additional information gained through active listening to dig deeper into areas that need further clarification and understanding.

From your questioning and listening cycle, identify the interests and positions of those involved. Interests are the needs and motivations that drive actions and decisions, while positions are specific proposals, demands, or solutions for which there is support. Conflict often arises when the focus from individuals is on their positions rather than their interests. By understanding the various interests and positions you can you establish any common ground, where there are differences, and what opportunities are available for any trade-offs.

You’ll find more information about active listening in the Meeting Communications section.