When Conflict Avoidance Is the Right Choice

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.