Welcome to
The Sage Source:
Insights in HR and Development
We aspire for our blog to serve as a valuable resource for information and inspiration.
Recently in an online course I was teaching around conflict resolution the question came up, “what happens when the other person refuses to let the conflict go?” We talk a lot about resolving conflict, but less about what happens afterward. Even when the conversation is over, the impact may remain. Trust does not automatically return because someone apologized, a meeting was held, or HR closed a case, and the other party might be unable to let go of their anger until real action is being taken. Rebuilding trust requires accountability, consistency, and a willingness to repair what was damaged. What breaks trust? Inconsistency, micromanaging, and gossip are all the obvious answers, but the mishandling of conflict with either avoidance, being overly direct and aggressive or the simple fact that resolution didn’t land very well with one party, can all have its impact. But if it’s the later reason, and you feel you have done everything you can to create a meaningful space to resolve conflict, be empathetic and listen to someone’s needs and trust has still not returned then it’s possible we are trying to move on to quickly. The best action one can take after conflict can sometimes allow for pause. We often talk about pause before responding or engaging in conflict, but it can also be a great tool to use after conflict as well to allow people to process and emotions to cool. One of the greatest gifts we can give others is to show respect and showing respect to someone’s emotions by not rushing past them but acknowledging them and letting them be without fixing it. When repair is possible, we can rebuild trust with this simple model I like from “The Trust Advisor” by Maister, Green & Galford Trust = Credibility + Reliability + Intimacy Self-Orientation We can have accuracy, dependability, empathy and discernment, while also thinking about their needs versus our own. All these steps over time can help you slowly rebuild trust and show goodwill in sticking with the resolution of conflict. When trust is not possible to rebuild, we have our values to guide us. This is where turning values affirmation exercise onto a particular circumstance or conflict can be beneficial to help guide you on your own behaviors. For instance, if kindness is a strong core value for you, then what behaviors can you create and reflect on that continue to show the other person kindness? What actions help you be kind through a difficult or awkward dynamic? Being self-guided in your own actions and forward movement after conflict will be the cornerstone for meaningful resolution when the other party has disengaged from resolution or the relationship. Ultimately, rebuilding trust after conflict is not about forcing closure or convincing someone to move on before they are ready. It is about showing, over time, that repair matters through consistent behavior, thoughtful accountability, and respect for the impact the conflict created. Sometimes trust can be rebuilt into something stronger, and sometimes the healthiest outcome is learning how to move forward with integrity, even when the relationship does not fully recover. Either way, conflict gives us an opportunity to practice who we want to be, steady, honest, empathetic, and guided by our values. When we stop treating resolution as the end of the process and begin seeing repair as part of the work, we create workplaces where trust has a real chance to return.
Most people have a story about HR, and often that story includes disappointment. Through layoffs, FMLA requests, harassment, difficult managers, and other workplace challenges, HR is meant to support employees. It should be a resource for people during some of the hardest moments, because we do not leave our personal experiences at the door when we come to work. But in many modern workplaces, that role has changed. HR is often feared, avoided, and burdened by a negative reputation. So how did we get here, and how can we do better? HR emerged in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, when organizations began to recognize that employee well-being was closely connected to productivity during the industrial revolution. Over time, the field gained momentum through labor strikes in the early 1900s, and ideas influenced by the Hawthorne Studies which changed our understanding of management theory. By the 1950s and 1960s, HR had become more established. Given its roots in improving working conditions, the question is: how do we return HR to that purpose? Recently, I’ve been reading Get It in Writing by Ryan Stygar, known online as Attorney Ryan. As someone starting a new HR business, I felt it was essential to add this perspective to my knowledge base and deepen my understanding of labor law. In the book, Stygar explains in detail what employees need to know about their rights at work. But after reading case study after case study—and seeing HR repeatedly framed as a form of “risk management” for companies—I began to question whether that description is accurate. I’ve had my own painful experiences with HR. In some cases, HR failed to protect me from harassment, bullying, and a hostile work environment until I eventually quit. I was often told that dealing with unacceptable behavior was simply part of my job. What stands out most to me is that, in trying to protect themselves, HR departments often do the opposite of effective risk management. Too often, they break the law instead, exposing their organizations to lawsuits, investigations, and damage to their own professional credibility. The truth is that a people-centered approach to HR is risk management. When organizations put the human experience at the center of how they lead and employ people, they reduce risk by addressing needs early and building healthier workplaces. Prioritizing people over short-term business interests is not a liability—it is one of the strongest protections an organization can have. So how can HR do better? It starts with returning to its original purpose: protecting people by creating safer, fairer, and more accountable workplaces. That means addressing harm early, responding to employee concerns with integrity, and recognizing that compliance alone is not enough. HR must be willing to challenge ineffective leadership, confront patterns of mistreatment, and advocate for systems that support both dignity and trust. Also, actively know the boundaries of the law, so you don’t go outside of it. If the field wants to rebuild credibility, it must stop asking employees to fear it and start giving them a reason to believe in it. For HR professionals, leaders, and organizations alike, the call is clear: build systems that protect people, listen before harm escalates, and treat trust as a responsibility—not a talking point.
Have you ever wondered if your team needs conflict resolution skills, de-escalation training, or perhaps both? What separates these two approaches? People often use the terms interchangeably, but conflict resolution and de-escalation are distinct skill sets to use at different stages of conflict. It can be crucial to deploy the right tools at the right time. When trying to repair a relationship when the emotions aren’t dealt with first, you can unintentionally escalate a conflict. Let’s break down the differences between de-escalation and conflict resolution and when to use both. What is De-escalation? Think of conflict resolution and de-escalation as tools in a toolbox: de-escalation is like a fire extinguisher, used to quickly cool down heated emotions and prevent the situation from getting out of control. Heated moments can come in waves, and deploying de-escalation can often happen repeatedly while we wait for others to processes the conflict. The most important part of de-escalation is to first learn to de-escalate yourself. Our own ability to self-regulate is crucial when it comes to practicing de-escalation. When we can self-regulate, we’re not as easily influenced to contribute to escalation. When self-regulated we can lean into the knowledge that we are all co-regulating with on another all the time and knowing this gives us the power to guide ourselves and those we’re in conflict with into a calmer state. De-escalation is both a verbal and nonverbal process, however our nonverbal cues are dominate and more important when trying to de-escalate someone. When someone is emotionally hijacked or in flight or fight, they are not listening but observing. Our nonverbal cues send the message of safety, and when that is backed by empathetic statements in a nonthreatening tone, a person can start to engage with their thinking brain and trust that others regard their concerns as highly as they do. To lean into co-regulation and cue de-escalation, stand openly and non-threateningly, maintain distance, keep a neutral expression and open palms, and soften your gaze, and head nodding to show listening and engagement. Lean in and mirror some cues to show empathy. Use a quiet, low voice for calm. What is Conflict Resolution? Conflict resolution, meanwhile, is like a set of blueprints and construction tools; once the immediate flames are out, you use these to investigate, rebuild understanding, and find lasting solutions. Conflict resolution consists of getting curious about what each party needs from resolution. When we focus on needs and move away from blame, judgement and criticism of the conflict we can get to the root of why we are in conflict. This is where our verbal communication starts to take center stage. When we articulate our own values and needs and ask the right questions and lean into the relationship building part of our preferred communication style we can resolve conflict in a health manner. Moving into conflict resolution and out of de-escalation, we engage in whole body listening, this means listening to all the verbal and nonverbal communication going on in the conflict. It is about reframing what you heard to clarify understanding, and finding common ground where understanding, adaption and resolution take place. Each approach plays a vital role, while de-escalation and conflict resolution are often mentioned together, each serves a unique purpose in managing workplace tension. De-escalation provides the immediate calm needed to create a safe environment, allowing everyone involved to regain composure. Only then can true conflict resolution begin, focusing on understanding core needs, values, and building lasting solutions. By equipping ourselves and our teams with both skill sets, we not only prevent unnecessary escalation but also pave the way for genuine connection and growth. Ultimately, mastering both approaches empowers us to turn moments of discord into opportunities for deeper trust, collaboration, and a healthier workplace culture.
