When Conflict Avoidance Is the Right Choice

Zoie Newman • March 3, 2026

Exploring Healthy Boundaries and Emotional Intelligence

Conflict Modes, a concept developed and taught by Thomas-Kilman, is the belief that we have different approaches to conflict on a scale of assertiveness and cooperation. These modes are avoidance, competing, collaborating, compromising, and accommodating. Individuals often favor one style based on comfort and their relationship to conflict influenced by their upbringing. Today I want to pull out conflict avoidance. Avoidance gets a bad reputation and often isn’t the best method to managing conflict, but as we take a deeper dive into this way of handling conflict, I hope to showcase some ways in which conflict avoidance can be a positive and necessary.


As with other methods of self-identification, conflict modes should be applied thoughtfully. According to theories based on emotional intelligence, understanding ourselves begins with recognizing that each individual has the capacity to utilize various conflict modes depending on the context. The same principle applies to communication and leadership styles; while certain tendencies may be predominant, expanding emotional awareness involves learning to adapt our approach and respond flexibly to circumstances that may call for different modes than those we typically employ or have been taught to avoid.


When avoidance is harmful


Most of us can relate to having someone in our lives who avoids conflict at all costs. This has come up a lot online lately with the overuse of “protecting our peace” to avoid any challenging discussion that might come our way. Chronic avoidance, not doubt, is harmful. Some of us might see this more specifically with a boss or someone who is in a leadership role. When leaders consistently evade addressing conflicts, it can be perceived as an immature approach to management and may result in staff handling disputes independently or inadequately—often leading to HR concerns, investigations, and significant disruptions in team dynamics. I have personally had many a boss and leader that has led with the belief that conflict within the team isn’t their responsibility. In most workshops I have run I ask leadership if conflict is something that they feel ok with, and almost no one raises their hand. Such avoidance creates a culture where mismanagement of disputes is perpetuated, resulting in unresolved issues and unmet needs within the team. Without clear examples and guidelines for effective conflict resolution set by leadership, disputes often remain unsettled.


When conflict avoidance is healthy


Conflict avoidance on its own is not necessarily problematic, it’s another tool in our toolbox, but one to use with care. As we have established, used in the wrong way avoidance degrades relationships and doesn’t help us access the healthy generative side of conflict. When used appropriately, avoidance can help us understand when conflict will move us forward in a relationship vs keep us stagnant, blaming or unsatisfied with an outcome that may never meet our needs or the needs of others.


I have again had many instances where conflict avoidance would have served me better than continuing to engage and here are a few of the things I have learned from these interactions. First, if you have attempted to engage someone in hard conversations with not being heard and the continued engagement will not help you get anything constructive out of that conflict it’s time to step away. Either step away from that conflict and resolve your own needs to the best of your ability, or its time to step away from the relationship.


Sometimes conflict avoidance also looks like an extended pause. I can think of a particular instance with a friend over a political discussion that became very devaluing to me, that avoiding continued discussion around this has been a thoughtful process of how I can understand my own needs and get some of my big emotions under control so I can set clearer and firmer boundaries. This is a strategic way of using emotional avoidance to help me process. Ethan Kross's book Shift suggests that distraction and avoidance are useful strategies for managing emotions. By using avoidance flexibly, we can express emotional conflict when it benefits us. While there is no one-size-fits-all method for managing conflict, avoidance is an evolved strategy for stepping back from overwhelming situations.


Conflict avoidance is deemed low on the scales of assertiveness and cooperativeness. When we are low on those scales our value of the relationship has either diminished or was never there. But this measure is not only for ourselves, but how we believe others measure us. If the person who we’re locked into conflict with diminishes the relationship and will not reflect on their impact, then avoiding hard conversations might be the best use of our time and energy. Although it's not always feasible to disengage with coworkers or supervisors, adjusting your strategy for handling conflict can help you focus your effort where it matters most.


In summary, conflict avoidance is not inherently negative; rather, it is a nuanced tool that, when applied thoughtfully, can protect relationships and promote emotional health. By recognizing when avoidance serves a constructive purpose and when it becomes detrimental, we gain the ability to navigate challenging situations with greater wisdom. Ultimately, the goal is to develop self-awareness and flexibility, allowing us to choose the conflict mode that best supports our needs and the needs of those around us, fostering a healthier and more resilient environment.



Share

The Sage Source: Insights in HR & Development

The Difference Between Conflict Resolution & De-escalation

By Zoie Newman • May 4, 2026
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.

Healthy Conflict Across Generations

By Zoie Newman • April 6, 2026
Generational differences are becoming an increasingly important topic in today’s workplace, influencing communication, teamwork, and mutual respect. The four central generations are experiencing significant social, emotional, and technological divides, which can reduce understanding and trust and lead to more conflict. This has created greater polarization, as people seek safety with peers close to their age rather than embracing opportunities for growth and a richer career through dynamic relationships across all generations. So how can we help build sturdier relationships, and reform trust with those of different ages? Like so many, I have certainly found myself in miscommunications and conflict fueled by generational differences. Having worked in healthcare as my first career, these generational differences can be stark, not only in the way incoming medical professionals are educated but also in the dynamics of staff and clinicians and most certainty in the communication from clinician to patient. However, generational conflict expands to all industries, and likely, you can relate to comments such as “back in my day”, “it’s just how the world works”, “they just want to work from home” that promote more of a cliché around generations than get to the heart of our differences and how they might benefit us instead of hinder us. In fact, most of the conflict that is fueled by our age diversity comes from overgeneralization and assumptions that we have made about one another that justifies our frustrations in tense moments. As a leading conversation, and an area I have found most mangers want greater support in, here are some ways we can make positive change. Embrace a needs-based communication style Coined by Dr. Marshall Rosenburg, needs based communication (or more commonly known as nonviolent communication) is a style of communication that de-escalates our language and focuses more on meeting the needs and values of a person. Our language can get us really bogged down in exaggeration, who deserves what, comparisons and judgments, all of which are breading grounds for our unconscious biases. If we can catch ourselves doing this and become aware of it, we can bring ourselves back to the human experience of others we are in conflict with. Next time you find yourself in a misunderstanding, conflict or difficult discussion again ask yourself these questions: What feelings do I notice being present? What needs am I trying to meet for myself? What needs do I think they are trying to meet? Are they the same as mine? What values do I hold that can help me navigate this? Understanding that individuals interact primarily to fulfill their needs—rather than to be confrontational—can fundamentally change how we view generational differences. Our shifting needs and circumstances, influenced by age and life experiences, shape our behaviors at work. By recognizing that each generation approaches its needs in unique ways, we open opportunities for building stronger, more innovative teams.  Embrace these diverse perspectives with openness and communicate around your needs, it will allow you to let go of judgement. Lean into shared values A place we can find commonality and maintain a needs-based approach to our communication is through values. Individuals all have a set of core values they live by, but what we don’t always realize is that we often share a lot of our value systems, we just have different ways of defining and honoring those values. Megan Gerhardt, in her book Gentelligence, goes on to identify that across age diversity we have four shared values in the workplace. These values are, Respect, Autonomy, Connection, Competency. No matter where you land on the generational spectrum, likely, these resonate with you, and it shows that we have more in common with one another than not. We all have the unique desire to be seen as skilled and valued for these skills as well as to experience both collaboration and freedom in our work. Knowing what shared values we may have across our generations, doesn’t however mean that hard work doesn’t have to happen to get to know one another. Our shared values are a foundational place to learn from, and when we incorporate that we collectively want to experience respect, autonomy, connection, and competency in the workplace we can start to get curious. However, it is still up to you to ask the open-ended questions that bring greater understanding and to check your own assumptions that might lead to unhealthy conflict. Fostering healthy conflict across generations starts with recognizing both our shared values and the unique needs that shape how we communicate and work together. By embracing needs-based communication, we reduce assumptions and judgments, allowing us to connect more authentically and build trust. Leaning into common values like respect, autonomy, connection, and competency, we create a foundation for positive change, regardless of age differences. While generational divides may fuel misunderstandings, curiosity and openness help us move beyond stereotypes and toward stronger, more collaborative workplaces. Ultimately, when we approach conflict with empathy and flexibility, we not only bridge generational gaps but also enrich our professional relationships and team dynamics.