Disagreements can remain "latent" (hidden beneath the surface) for weeks until a small trigger causes a sudden blow-up.
Guided Notes Check: Record the definition of conflict in Box 1!
Root Causes
Workplace conflict isn't just about "bad attitudes." Most friction stems from 7 systemic causes:
1
Differing Personalities
2
Status & Hierarchy
3
Differences in Values
4
Workplace Dependencies
5
Stress & Exhaustion
6
Unhealthy Competition
7
Communication Breakdowns
Let's examine how each trigger plays out in daily job settings.
Triggers 1 & 2
1
People come from varied backgrounds, cultures, and ages. A style of expression that seems completely "normal" to one person can feel blunt, sarcastic, or offensive to another.
Example: Direct speaker vs. subtle listener misinterpreting intent.
2
Organizational hierarchy can breed resentment. Workers may feel a boss is micromanaging or abusing authority, while leaders may feel employees overstep their roles when questioning directives.
Example: A manager irritated by a team member proposing deadline shifts.
Key reflection: How does someone's title influence how you hear their feedback?
Triggers 3 & 4
3
Disagreements over work ethic, generational expectations, or acceptable standards. Friction explodes when people refuse to see or respect another person's underlying ideology.
Example: One employee prioritizes speed while another insists on slow perfection.
4
When your ability to finish a task depends on someone else handing off their part, but role boundaries are blurry. One feels delayed; the other feels bossed around.
Example: Two coworkers with unclear task boundaries blaming each other for late files.
Notice how unclear job descriptions directly cause interpersonal tension!
Triggers 5, 6 & 7
5. Stress
Exhaustion impairs emotional regulation. Small misunderstandings escalate into hostile outbursts when deadlines overwhelm.
6. Competition
Believing someone else's success threatens your promotion. Werner assumes Jake's win means Werner loses out.
7. Communication
Vague emails, forgotten updates, tone misreads, or failing to ask clarifying questions before assuming bad intentions.
Guided Notes Check: Match the 7 triggers in Section 2 of your notes!
The Fork in the Road
Conflict is not the disaster. Unresolved conflict is the disaster.
Framework
In the 1970s, researchers Kenneth Thomas and Ralph Kilmann identified 5 distinct styles of responding to conflict, based on two core factors:
How much you focus on satisfying your own needs, goals, and interests.
How much you focus on satisfying the other person's needs and preserving the relationship.
Let's explore each of the 5 styles: Avoiding, Accommodating, Competing, Compromising, Collaborating.
Style 1
Denying that a conflict exists, postponing talks, sidestepping the topic, or pretending everything is fine to avoid uncomfortable confrontation.
Low assertiveness & low cooperativeness (Lose/Lose).
Issues fester silently and explode later.
When is it Useful?
When the issue is trivial, temporary, or when emotions are so overheated that people need time to cool down before speaking rationally.
"I don't have time to deal with this right now."
Motto: "I'd rather pretend nothing is wrong."
Style 2
Being completely selfless and surrendering your own preferences to let the other person have their way. Downplaying your own needs to preserve harmony.
Low assertiveness & high cooperativeness (Lose/Win).
Resentment builds over time as your needs are never met.
When is it Useful?
When you realize you were clearly in the wrong, or when the issue matters far more to the other person than it does to you.
"Whatever you prefer is totally fine with me."
Motto: "Your peace is more important than my opinion."
Style 3
Pursuing your own goals at the other person's expense. Using power, rank, or aggressive debate to "win" the argument regardless of how it affects the other person.
High assertiveness & low cooperativeness (Win/Lose).
Damages relationships and breeds long-term hostility.
When is it Useful?
In emergency crises requiring quick, decisive action, or when standing firm against dangerous or unethical behavior.
"We are doing it this way because I said so."
Motto: "My way or the highway."
Style 4
Finding a middle ground where both parties get some of what they want, but also give up something. Neither party walks away completely satisfied or completely empty-handed.
Moderate assertiveness & moderate cooperativeness.
Can be a quick patch that ignores the deeper root cause.
When is it Useful?
When time is tight, both sides have equal power, and a workable temporary solution is urgently needed.
"Let's split the difference 50/50."
Motto: "Half a loaf is better than no bread."
Style 5
Both parties work together as problem-solving partners to uncover everyone's underlying needs and create a solution that fully satisfies all participants without sacrifice.
High assertiveness & high cooperativeness (Win/Win).
Requires high trust, openness, and significant time.
When is it Useful?
When the outcome is critical, long-term relationships matter deeply, and diverse perspectives are essential for success.
"Let's put our heads together to solve this."
Motto: "Two heads are better than one."
Critical Insight
While Collaborating produces the richest solutions, it is not always practical. If you have 5 minutes before a presentation, you cannot do a 2-hour root-cause deep dive—you need to Compromise or let a manager Compete.
Avoiding: Great when someone is furious and needs 15 minutes to cool down.
Competing: Vital when safety rules or ethics are being violated.
Accommodating: Smart when preserving a client relationship outweighs winning a minor point.
A true Conflict Navigator chooses their style based on the context, not habit.
Day 1 Checkpoint
1. "You don't know what you're talking about. We are doing this my way, period." Competing
2. "I don't mind staying late if it keeps you happy. My plans aren't that big a deal." Accommodating
3. "Let's list all our needs on the whiteboard and create a whole new schedule together." Collaborating
Turn to Section 3 in your Guided Notes and complete the scenario matching activity!
Day 1 Wrap-Up
⚖️
It is inevitable when humans work together. It becomes toxic only if ignored.
🔍
Personalities, status, values, dependencies, stress, competition, and communication.
🧭
Avoiding, accommodating, competing, compromising, collaborating each have unique roles.
Tomorrow on Day 2: Master the 4-part I-statement formula and solve a real workplace crisis!
Day 2 Session Resolution Strategies & Tools
Today we put theory into practice: learning how to speak without triggering defensiveness and how to structure a solution.
Warm-Up Recall: What is the difference between Compromise and Collaboration? 50/50 Split vs. Win/Win!
Resolution Guideline 1
It is ten times easier to address a minor misunderstanding in week 1 than to defuse a toxic war in month 6.
Conflict resolution can only start when both sides acknowledge that an issue exists.
View conflict not as an embarrassment, but as an opportunity for growth, innovation, and deeper mutual understanding.
Healthy teams disagree often and resolve swiftly.
Rule of Thumb: The longer you wait, the harder it gets to fix.
Resolution Guideline 2
Most people don't listen with the intent to understand; they listen with the intent to reply.
Listen without interrupting. Clarify what you heard before answering. When the other person feels genuinely heard, their defensiveness melts away.
Stay impartial. Look at the issue from all perspectives. Listen not only to what people say, but to what they are feeling beneath the surface.
Guided Notes Check: Record the 3 listening rules in Section 4!
Resolution Guideline 3
Surface Position
"I refuse to work on the weekend shift with Chris!"
Arguing over positions creates an immediate deadlock.
Underlying Need
"I need reliable childcare on Saturdays, and Chris doesn't give me advance notice."
Once the real need is named, solving it is straightforward!
Ask: "What need or concern is driving this proposed demand?"
Behavioral Traps to Avoid
1
Starting sentences with words like "You ALWAYS..." or "You NEVER..." or dredging up past mistakes from six months ago.
Why it fails: It is almost always inaccurate and instantly puts the other person on defense.
2
Constantly talking over people, interrupting their sentences, rolling eyes, or showing impatience while they explain their side.
Why it fails: Communication completely breaks down when people compete for speaking time.
Avoid absolute statements: stick strictly to the current, specific event.
Behavioral Traps to Avoid
3
Acting like an immovable "stone wall"—giving the silent treatment, refusing to answer, or walking away when someone attempts to talk.
Why it fails: Freezes progress, escalates frustration, and destroys interpersonal trust.
4
Always blaming and criticizing the other person, mocking them in public, or trying to embarrass them to "win" the point.
Why it fails: Shifts focus from solving the actual problem to attacking the person's character.
Guided Notes Check: Match the 4 traps in Section 5 of your notes!
The Communication Tool
When addressing a problem, replace accusing "You-Statements" with a 4-Part I-Statement:
Part 1
Name your specific feeling or emotion honestly without attacking.
Part 2
Describe the specific factual action or situation neutrally.
Part 3
Explain the concrete impact or consequence on your work or life.
Part 4
Propose a realistic, constructive request or solution.
Why this works: People cannot argue with your honest feelings and factual impacts!
Transformation
Toxic "You" Statement
"You are always lazy and leaving me to do everything. You clearly don't care about our team grade at all!"
Result: Anger, instant denial, counter-attacks, stonewalling.
4-Part I-Statement
"I feel stressed when slides are turned in right at the deadline because I have to scramble to format them. Could we agree to finish drafts 24 hours early?"
Result: Focus stays on the deadline schedule, not personal insults.
Notice how the I-statement attacks the problem, not the person!
Guided Practice
Raw Accusation:
"You are so loud and annoying! You're ruining my focus and you don't respect anyone!"
Reframed 4-Part I-Statement:
Write your own practice I-statement in Guided Notes Section 6!
Real-World Case Study
Martin (manager) and Debbie (team member) have worked at the same company for two years. Martin calls daily morning team briefings.
However, Martin is habitually 15–20 minutes late to the briefings. Debbie is deeply frustrated: it delays her workday, wastes team time, and forces her to work overtime.
Today, Debbie has waited 20 minutes again. How should she handle this without destroying their professional working relationship?
Let's navigate the 5 critical decision points!
Follow along in Section 7 of your Guided Notes to evaluate each step!
Case Decisions 1 & 2
Decision 1: Action
Best Choice: Decide to speak with Martin directly to settle it professionally.
Why? Gossiping with coworkers or deliberately showing up late too will only escalate toxicity.
Decision 2: Setting
Best Choice: Approach him at his desk and politely ask: "Do you have a few minutes to speak?"
Why? Never ambush a supervisor in the cafeteria or in front of the team. Respect privacy and time.
Key lesson: Public confrontations guarantee defensiveness. Always choose private settings.
Case Decisions 3 & 4
Decision 3: Posture
Best Choice: Ask permission to sit and seat herself on eye level with Martin.
Why? Standing and looming over someone feels intimidating and aggressive. Eye-level creates equality.
Decision 4: Words
Best Choice: "Martin, I feel frustrated when morning meetings start late because waiting wastes team time and forces us to stay late to finish our work."
Why? Factual, honest, and free of "You always..." hyperbole.
Clear body language + 4-part I-statement = Professional power.
Case Decisions 5 & 6
Decision 5: Listen
Debbie pauses and lets Martin explain. Martin reveals: The District Administrator calls every morning at 8:45 AM demanding urgent updates!
Now the real trigger is clear: It wasn't laziness; it was a status dependency conflict!
Decision 6: Collaborate
Debbie: "I understand you have to take that call. Can we simply move our team briefing 30 minutes later to 9:30 AM?"
Martin can finish his executive call, and the team starts on time without waiting. Both win!
Collaboration solved the problem without either party losing face!
The Playbook
1
Identify your own real need before speaking.
2
Ask for a private, dedicated time to talk.
3
Express feelings & concrete impacts without blame.
4
Uncover the other person's hidden pressures.
5
Explore options and agree on a practical next step.
Memorize these 5 steps: They will serve you in every workplace, classroom, and relationship.
Mastery Evaluation
Which conflict style is your personal "default" (Avoiding, Accommodating, Competing, Compromising, or Collaborating)? What is one situation where you will try a different style?
Clear minds, confident navigators!
Conflict Navigators • Two-Period Workplace Workshop Good luck on your Mastery Quiz!
| High-stakes goals; deep trust available |
Check Your Style Recall: Which style is demonstrated below?
1. "I don't care what you think; my plan is the one we are submitting." → Style:
2. "Let's brainstorm a shared plan where both of our goals are met." → Style:
Conflict Navigators • Student Guided Notes Page 1 of 2 (Day 1)
Student Resource • Day 2
Active Communication Tools
1. Don't hide from tension! It is far easier to solve an issue on before it escalates.
2. Always to understand what the other person is saying rather than reacting to defend yourself.
3. Look beneath surface demands to discover the real driving the disagreement.
1. Overgeneralizing ("You always...") [ ]
2. Forgetting to Listen [ ]
3. Stonewalling [ ]
4. Playing the Blame Game [ ]
A. Giving silent treatment or refusing to talk at all.
B. Criticizing the person instead of the task issue.
C. Exaggerating habits with "you always" or "you never".
D. Interrupting and rushing to speak over someone.
1. I feel... (Emotion: frustrated / stressed / concerned)
2. When you... (Factual event, no exaggerations)
3. Because... (Concrete consequence or impact)
4. I need/prefer... (Constructive solution request)
Step 1: Setting: Where does Debbie approach Martin? [ At his desk in private | In crowded lunchroom ]
Step 2: Body Language: How should Debbie position herself? [ Standing over Martin | Ask permission to sit on eye-level ]
Step 3: Message: What communication tool does Debbie use? [ 4-Part I-Statement | Accusing "You-Statement" ]
Step 4: Listening: Why was Martin actually running late? [ Lazy coffee breaks | Daily boss call at 8:45 AM ]
Step 5: Win-Win Solution: What collaborative agreement is reached? [ Cancel briefings | Reschedule meeting 30 min later ]
Conflict Navigators • Student Guided Notes Page 2 of 2 (Day 2)
| Win / Win (Both fully satisfied) |
| High-stakes goals; deep trust available |
Check Your Style Recall (Answers):
1. "I don't care what you think; my plan is the one we are submitting." → Style: Competing
2. "Let's brainstorm a shared plan where both of our goals are met." → Style: Collaborating
Conflict Navigators • Teacher Answer Key Page 1 of 2 (Day 1)
Teacher Answer Key • Day 2
Teacher Evaluation Reference
1. Don't hide from tension! It is far easier to solve an issue early on before it escalates.
2. Always listen to understand what the other person is saying rather than reacting to defend yourself.
3. Look beneath surface demands to discover the real needs driving the disagreement.
1. Overgeneralizing ("You always...") [ C ]
2. Forgetting to Listen [ D ]
3. Stonewalling [ A ]
4. Playing the Blame Game [ B ]
A. Giving silent treatment or refusing to talk at all.
B. Criticizing the person instead of the task issue.
C. Exaggerating habits with "you always" or "you never".
D. Interrupting and rushing to speak over someone.
1. I feel...
frustrated and stressed
2. When you...
arrive 15–20 minutes late to morning meetings
3. Because...
it delays our work and forces us to stay late to finish
4. I need/prefer...
that we move the briefing start time 30 minutes later
Step 1: Setting: Where does Debbie approach Martin? At his desk in private
Step 2: Body Language: How should Debbie position herself? Ask permission to sit on eye-level
Step 3: Message: What communication tool does Debbie use? 4-Part I-Statement
Step 4: Listening: Why was Martin actually running late? Daily boss call at 8:45 AM
Step 5: Win-Win Solution: What collaborative agreement is reached? Reschedule meeting 30 min later
Conflict Navigators • Teacher Answer Key Page 2 of 2 (Day 2)
C. High Stress / Exhaustion
Conflict Navigators • Mastery Assessment Page 1 of 2
Section 2: Management Styles, Behavioral Traps & Resolution Skills
Part II: Questions 6–10
6. Match the 5 Thomas-Kilmann conflict styles to their defining action by writing the correct letter in the bracket:
1. Avoiding [ ]
2. Accommodating [ ]
3. Competing [ ]
4. Compromising [ ]
5. Collaborating [ ]
STYLE DESCRIPTIONS:
A. Finding a 50/50 middle ground where both parties give up something.
B. Denying tension exists and postponing or dodging the conversation.
C. Forcing your way using assertiveness and power (Win/Lose).
D. Exploring all needs together to create a mutually satisfying Win/Win.
E. Selflessly letting the other person have their way to keep the peace.
7. When is the Competing (assertive/forcing) style considered appropriate in the workplace?
A. Whenever a coworker suggests an idea different from your own. B. When standing firm against unsafe, illegal, or unethical actions. C. During every daily meeting to show coworkers you are in charge. D. Only when you are feeling stressed and don't have time to listen.
8. Which behavior is an example of the toxic communication trap called Stonewalling?
A. Starting every sentence with accusations like "You always mess this up!" B. Giving the silent treatment, refusing to answer questions, or walking away when addressed. C. Interrupting someone repeatedly before they can finish their sentence. D. Blaming organizational policies rather than taking personal responsibility.
9. Debbie's manager, Martin, is consistently 15–20 minutes late to morning briefings, delaying the team. Which response is the BEST example of a 4-Part I-Statement?
A. "Martin, you are always late. It's ridiculous that you expect us to sit here waiting for you every single morning." B. "Martin, as a manager you are supposed to set an example. The team is tired of your total lack of professionalism." C. "Martin, I feel frustrated when meetings start late because waiting delays our work and forces us to stay overtime. Can we shift the meeting time by 30 minutes?" D. "Martin, if you can't be on time, I am going to report this to human resources immediately."
10. Immediately after Debbie delivers her I-statement to Martin, what is the CORRECT action for her to take?
A. Get up and leave immediately so Martin can think about what he did wrong. B. Pause, actively listen, and allow Martin to explain his side of the issue without interruption. C. Demand that Martin sign a written contract promising he will never be late again. D. Repeat her statement louder to make sure he heard how upset she was.
Conflict Navigators • Mastery Assessment Page 2 of 2
8. Identifying Stonewalling (10 pts) CORRECT: B
Rationale: Stonewalling is refusing to engage or communicate, shutting down, or giving the silent treatment. Option A is overgeneralizing; Option C is forgetting to listen.
9. Best 4-Part I-Statement (10 pts) CORRECT: C
Rationale: Option C fulfills all 4 parts: (1) "I feel frustrated", (2) "when meetings start late", (3) "because waiting delays our work...", (4) "Can we shift the meeting time by 30 minutes?" Options A and B contain accusatory "you" generalizations.
10. Action Following I-Statement (10 pts) CORRECT: B
Rationale: After stating your feelings and needs, you must listen without interrupting to uncover the other person's perspective. Martin's late arrival was caused by an administrator call.
If students struggled with Styles (Q6–7): Revisit the dual axes (Assertiveness vs. Cooperativeness). Have them draw the 2x2 grid and place daily examples.
If students struggled with I-Statements (Q9–10): Use the 4-part fill-in sentence frame and practice converting angry tweets or texts into professional I-statements.
Conflict Navigators • Teacher Quiz Key Page 2 of 2
