By Jer Swigart
For too long, we’ve been conditioned to view conflict as something to avoid—an unfortunate disruption, a problem to be fixed, or a relationship-breaker. We associate it with tension, division, and loss. But what if we’ve misunderstood it? What if conflict isn’t the problem, but rather how we engage with it determines whether it creates harm or cultivates trust?
This theme came up in our most recent episode of the Mending Divides Podcast with Spiritual Director, Leadership Coach, and Conflict Consultant, Nina Barnes. Her insight, alongside other leading experts in conflict transformation–scholars like John Paul Lederach, Kenneth Cloke, and Michelle LeBaron—invite us into a paradigm shift: conflict is not only inevitable; it’s necessary for growth, creativity, and meaningful connection.
Lederach, a globally recognized expert in peacebuilding, argues that conflict is a space of possibility—a place where change can take root. If we engage conflict with curiosity rather than fear, we open the door for deeper understanding, more authentic relationships, and lasting innovation. In his book The Moral Imagination, Lederach highlights how conflict, when approached with wisdom and presence, can lead to creative breakthroughs that would otherwise remain inaccessible.
We have found that leaders, teams, and relationships that learn to embrace and navigate conflict well don’t just survive; they thrive. But this requires a significant shift in how we approach and respond to conflict.
The Inevitability of Conflict
Human beings are wired for connection, yet we are also profoundly diverse in our perspectives, values, and experiences. This diversity, while a strength, guarantees that conflict will arise. Research in social psychology affirms that wherever there is relationship, there is the potential for disagreement. Morton Deutsch, a pioneer in conflict resolution, identified conflict as “a normal and inevitable aspect of human relationships.” The real question, then, is not whether conflict will occur, but how we will engage with it.
Many of us have been trained—both explicitly and implicitly—to respond to conflict in ways that create harm. Some of us avoid it at all costs, pretending it doesn’t exist until resentment quietly erodes our teams and communities. Others meet it with aggression, turning difference into a battlefield of winners and losers. Still others seek to compromise without truly addressing the deeper issues, settling for superficial peace rather than true resolution. While each of these approaches is circumstantially necessary, none of them foster trust or transformation.
How We’ve Been Trained to Deal With Conflict
Our default responses to conflict often stem from early experiences—family dynamics, cultural influences, and organizational norms. If we grew up in a household where conflict was explosive and unsafe, we may have learned to avoid it at all costs. If we were rewarded for being “right” and winning arguments, we may have developed a combative approach. If our workplaces valued harmony over honesty, we may have been conditioned to suppress our real concerns.
These inherited patterns shape our conflict responses in ways we rarely examine. But awareness is the first step toward change. If we want to engage conflict in a way that cultivates trust and transformation, we must first understand how we’ve been shaped by our past.
The Five Conflict Styles
Kenneth Thomas and Ralph Kilmann developed a widely respected framework outlining five primary conflict-handling styles. Each style has strengths and limitations, and no single approach is always right or wrong. The key is understanding our default style and expanding our capacity to use different approaches when appropriate.
- Avoiding: This style minimizes or withdraws from conflict altogether. While it can be useful when emotions are too high for productive dialogue, habitual avoidance leads to unresolved tension and suppressed concerns.
- Accommodating: Those who accommodate prioritize relationships over their own needs, often yielding to others to maintain peace. While this approach can demonstrate care, overuse can lead to resentment and unmet needs.
- Competing: A competitive approach seeks to win, often at the expense of the other party. While this style can be effective in high-stakes decisions where quick action is needed, it can also breed hostility and damage relationships.
- Compromising: Compromise seeks middle ground, ensuring that both parties get something they want. While useful in many situations, compromise doesn’t always address deeper underlying issues.
- Collaborating: Collaboration aims for a win-win outcome, valuing both relationship and results. While this approach requires time and effort, it often leads to the most creative and sustainable solutions.
An Invitation to Reflection
Which conflict style do you tend to default to? And why? How did your family, culture, or professional environment shape the way you approach conflict? Do you reflect what has been modeled for you or is your approach a reaction to it?
Understanding your own patterns is the first step toward growth. The good news is that navigating conflict is a skill that can be developed. As you grow in self-awareness and experiment with different approaches, you can move beyond simply managing conflict to leveraging it as a powerful tool for connection, creativity, and change.
Conflict isn’t the enemy. It’s the invitation—to listen more deeply, to lead more wisely, and to transform workplaces, relationships, and communities into spaces of trust and flourishing.
