WorkplaceHero
All mini courses

Handling conflict at work

A short interactive course on the five conflict styles, when each fits, and the cost of using the wrong one.

0.5h CPD on completion - free

Introduction

Conflict at work is normal and, handled well, is not automatically a bad sign. Two people who disagree about the best way to do something, or who have competing priorities on a shared deadline, are not necessarily failing at their jobs. The problem is not conflict itself but using the wrong style to handle it for the stakes and relationship involved.

Most people have a default conflict style that they reach for regardless of the situation. Some default to avoiding disagreement altogether, which can mean small issues grow into large ones. Others default to competing, winning the immediate argument at the cost of the working relationship. Neither is wrong in every situation, but both are wrong in most situations if used automatically.

This course covers the five conflict styles, how to judge which fits a given situation based on stakes and time, and how to spot your own overused default.

Learning aim and objectives

To help learners choose a conflict resolution style that fits the stakes and relationship involved, rather than defaulting to habit.

By the end of this course you will be able to:

  • Name the five conflict styles and what each trades off
  • Match a conflict style to the stakes, time available and relationship
  • Explain the risk of habitually avoiding conflict
  • Explain the risk of habitually competing in conflict
  • Spot their own avoidance or escalation pattern
About 30 minutes - logs 0.5h to your CPD on completion.
Conflict choicesMatch your response to the stakes
CompeteFast decision, low collaboration
AccommodateProtect the relationship
AvoidPause a low-value conflict
CollaborateInvest time for a better answer

The five styles

  • Competing - I win, you lose. Fast, but costs the relationship.
  • Accommodating - you win, I lose. Preserves the relationship short-term, at a cost to you.
  • Avoiding - nobody wins, nobody loses, because nobody addresses it. Fine for trivial issues, corrosive for real ones.
  • Compromising - we both give something up. A workable middle ground when time is short.
  • Collaborating - we find something better than either of us started with. The best outcome when time and trust allow it, but it takes longer.

Each style is the right tool in some situations and the wrong one in most others if used by habit.

A disagreement with a tight deadline

Part 1 of 2

Two team members disagree about the order of work on a shared project. The deadline is in three days.

The cost of an overused default

Habitual avoiders often see small issues become large ones, because the conversation that would have taken five minutes early becomes a formal process later. Habitual competers often win individual arguments while steadily losing trust and goodwill from colleagues, which shows up later as reduced cooperation. Recognising your own default is less about self-criticism and more about knowing when to deliberately choose a different style.

Your default conflict style

Quick quiz
Find your closest style
1 / 4

When you disagree with someone you:

Knowledge check

6 questions. Pick an answer to see whether it is right and why.

1.Which conflict style means nobody wins because nobody addresses the issue?

2.Why did compromise fit the scenario with two colleagues and a three-day deadline?

3.What is the main risk of habitually avoiding conflict?

4.What is the main risk of habitually competing in conflict?

5.Which style typically produces the best outcome but requires more time and trust?

6.In the follow-up stage, why was a separate conversation about dividing future work suggested?

Know your workplace

Conflict is inevitable, but how it is handled is often shaped by workplace processes. Check the following.

  • Does your organisation have an informal resolution route before anything becomes a formal grievance?
  • Who is trained in mediation or conflict resolution in your workplace, if anyone?
  • At what point would a workplace disagreement need to be escalated to HR or a manager?
Further learning and useful resources
Key takeaways
  • Competing, accommodating, avoiding, compromising and collaborating are all valid in the right situation
  • Avoiding is fine for trivial issues but risky for real ones, which tend to grow if left unaddressed
  • Compromising suits short timeframes and moderate stakes
  • Collaborating gives the best outcome but needs more time and trust
  • A habitual competing style can win arguments while steadily losing goodwill
  • Repeated conflict between the same people is worth addressing directly, not just resolving case by case
Reflect

Where might you be over-using your default style? Name one situation.

Your reflection is saved to your CPD log when you mark the course complete.

Continue your learning

Finish and log to CPD

Sign in to mark this course complete and add 0.5h to your CPD log. Don't have a log yet? We'll create one for you - free.

Looking for the deep-dive read? Read the full handling conflict at work guide