Survey report

April 2015

Getting under
the skin of
workplace conflict:
Tracing the experiences
of employees
The CIPD is the professional body for HR and people
development. The not-for-profit organisation champions
better work and working lives and has been setting the
benchmark for excellence in people and organisation
development for more than 100 years. It has more than
135,000 members across the world, provides thought
leadership through independent research on the world of
work, and offers professional training and accreditation for
those working in HR and learning and development.
Getting under the skin of workplace
conflict: Tracing the experiences of
employees
Survey report

Contents
Summary of key findings 2

Introduction 4

1 The scale of workplace conflict 7

2 Which relationships are most prone to conflict? 10

3 What issues spark conflict? 12

4 How do people behave in conflict? 13

5 The impact of conflict 17

6 Responding to conflict 20

7 Finding resolution 26

Conclusions 28

References 30

Acknowledgements
This report was written by Jonny Gifford at the CIPD. The CIPD would like to thank YouGov for conducting
the survey. We would also like to thank those who provided input to the survey questions: Marion Brown,
Michael Farrier, Richard Saundry and Gemma Wibberley. Finally, for their valuable comments on a draft
of this report, we would particularly like to thank Paul Latreille of Sheffield University, Richard Saundry of
Plymouth University and Peter Urwin of the University of Westminster.

1   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
Summary of key findings

‘The single Recent UK policy developments,

including the introduction of
words, with the people we work
most closely and are less able to
most common employment tribunal fees, place avoid.
more onus on employers to resolve
contributor conflict in-house and at an earlier Conflict is seen to be more
stage. Organisations need to develop common with one’s superiors
to conflict is both effective conflict resolution than more junior members of
differences in practices and robust cultures in
which it is easier to challenge
staff. This conflict with our line
managers (or their bosses) is
personality or without conflict escalating. To
achieve this we need to understand
viewed as being most serious and
having the greatest consequences,
styles of working, the dynamics of workplace conflict for example, in demotivation or
more fully. stress. This points to an important
supporting a power dynamic in conflict, which
relational view of Based on a representative survey
of 2,195 UK employees, this
in turn highlights the importance
of conflict resolution skills in line
conflict.’ research contributes to this aim
by tracing people’s experiences
management.

of conflict, the impacts it has on Issues in conflict

them, how they respond and to We find that the single most
what effect. common contributor to conflict
is differences in personality or
Our main focus is relationship styles of working, supporting a
conflict – in other words, relational view of conflict. However,
interpersonal friction borne our survey findings also support
of annoyance or frustration – an issue-based view of conflict.
although this can be linked to Individual performance, target-
task or process conflict rooted in setting and the level of support
different views on what should be or resources are the typical
done or how. We also focus on foci, being far more common
individual conflict as opposed to than employment contracts or
collective or ‘industrial’ disputes, promotions.
or team or group conflict. Our
concern is problems in one-to-one Behaviour in conflict
relationships and the impact on The most common negative
individual employees behaviour reported in conflict is a
lack of respect, again highlighting
People in conflict that a major aspect of conflict
Our survey finds four in ten UK boils down to failing to relate
employees report some form of to each other as individuals in a
interpersonal conflict at work in healthy way. Aside from this, we
the last year, either an isolated find a wide spread of reported
dispute or incident of conflict and/ behaviours, including bullying and
or an ongoing difficult relationship. refusal to co-operate, shouting and
Conflict is most common with verbal abuse. Actual or threatened
one’s line manager, followed by physical abuse is far rarer and
colleagues and people who one’s typically comes from people
line manager reports to; in other outside the organisation.

2   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
We note major perception gaps Responses to conflict discipline procedures alone, as this
in the behaviour we experienced Informal approaches to resolving will often mean conflict festers until it
from others and that which we conflict are by far the most common, escalates to a serious level.
believe others have experienced including discussing the matter
from us. This supports the theory of with one’s manager, HR personnel Organisational differences
attribution bias, which proposes that or the other person directly. We Our survey suggests interpersonal
we are consistently more favourable also often talk to friends and family, conflict may be experienced more
in interpreting our own behaviour although this does not appear to help often in the public and voluntary
than that of other people. It is also a resolve conflict – perhaps a case of sectors than the private sector.
worrying sign, as research by Jehn et complaining to the wrong person. We However, this may be as much a
al (2010) shows, that differences in use formal options, such as grievance reflection of how conflict is dealt
perceptions of conflict are associated and discipline procedures, less often – with and viewed as of the incidence
with decreased performance and in one in ten cases of conflict. of conflict. For example, on the one
creativity within groups. hand, bullying and harassment seem
However, it should be noted that to be terms more readily applied in
Impacts from conflict different approaches tend to be used the public sector; on the other hand,
The most common impact of for different issues. In particular, we public sector organisations are also
conflict is that people find it are most likely to take a direct and more likely to use mediation.
stressful and experience a drop in informal approach in conflict about
motivation or commitment. Fewer individual performance and levels A more influential factor in conflict is
but still sizable proportions of of support or resources. In contrast, organisational size. It is particularly
employees in conflict witness drops formal procedures are most likely interesting to note at what point the
in productivity or relationships to be used in cases of absence greatest shifts occur: not between
becoming unworkable. One in ten management. medium and large organisations, or
cases of what we call conflict results even between small and medium, but
in one or other party leaving their Resolving conflict between micro organisations (fewer
organisation or moving job. Employees’ views on how well their than ten employees) and anything
conflict was resolved are spread right larger. Essentially, micro organisations
Clearly, the greatest impact of across the board, from fully resolved appear to deal with conflict more
conflict is on employee well-being, to not at all resolved. We are most informally and more effectively.
which has ethical implications for likely to feel conflict is resolved if it
good employment practice. The is with one of our reports; far less Thus, it seems that as organisations
more tangible business impacts, likely if it is with one of our superiors. grow in size, their complexity and
such as sickness absence, are This again points to the significant structures can very quickly get in
less common, but the sizable influence of power dynamics and thus the way of resolving conflict swiftly
impacts perceived on factors such the importance of having effective and effectively. Our organisations
as motivation and productivity procedures that can cut through them. may be less social, and we may be
highlight that interpersonal conflict less able to resolve our differences
is an important business issue. From The use of both informal discussions with open conversations, than we
any angle, the conflict this survey and formal channels substantially might like to think.
explores must not be brushed under raises the chances that employees
the carpet. perceive a successful resolution. This reinforces the message
However, as mentioned above, to that relying purely upon formal
The conflict that hits motivation some extent this is a case of horses procedures to resolve conflict is not
and commitment hardest is that for courses, as we tend to use a healthy option. Alongside these,
which undermines the basics of different approaches in different even in relatively small organisations,
the employment relationship – scenarios. Thus, it is crucial to have we need concerted action to develop
favourable terms and conditions, a a balanced suite of options for the skills and encourage methods,
sense of progression and support conflict resolution. In particular this such as mediation, that enable more
when we are ill or cannot work. should include approaches such direct and informal approaches.
One or other party is most likely as mediation, which are currently Such action may not make the more
to leave their job due to conflict rarer options than formal channels, established grievance and discipline
when it is seen to have roots in a but importantly provide a way to procedures redundant, but will
personality clash. facilitate informal discussions. It does help nip potentially very damaging
little good to rely on grievance and conflict in the bud.

3   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
Introduction

‘We need robust The changing context of

conflict resolution
approaches to managing conflict,
rather than focusing on developing
cultures in which Recent years have seen some interpersonal skills of managers.
significant changes in policy on CIPD research finds that at all
it is possible to dealing with workplace conflict. In levels of management, having
particular, following a shift over a difficult conversations and
challenge and number of years from collective managing conflict are very clearly
hold each other industrial action towards the use
of employment tribunals, July
seen as the top two leadership
challenges (CIPD 2013c).
to account, and 2013 saw the introduction of
employment tribunal fees and new Furthermore, high-profile corporate
do so without tribunal procedure rules. Along disasters over recent years – for
with this, provision was introduced example in banking, the NHS and
undue risk of for settlement agreements the BBC – point to a critical lack
creating damaging that include ‘without prejudice’
conversations (Acas 2013); and
of courageous conversations.
Conflicts of interest, process
relationship in April 2014, Acas launched its
Early Conciliation service, building
conflict (Behfar et al 2011) and task
conflict will always emerge, and
conflict.’ on its experience of pre-claim by injecting critical evaluation, the
conciliation. latter in particular can be beneficial
(Jehn and Mannix 2001).
Thus, policy has been developed,
on the one hand, to directly Now, perhaps more than ever,
reduce the number of employment organisations need to be able to
tribunals, and on the other hand work through such conflict in a
to help resolve conflict earlier on safe environment. We need robust
in the process. The logic behind cultures in which it is possible to
the latter is that once conflict challenge and hold each other
resolution becomes formal and to account, and do so without
legalistic, parties become more undue risk of creating damaging
firmly entrenched and solutions relationship conflict.
that provide optimal outcomes
for both parties become less likely CIPD research programme on
(Gibbons 2007). conflict management
Since the CIPD’s 2011 Conflict
For employers and their Management survey report, a
organisations, this means that range of publications dealing
greater onus is being placed on with the subject of workplace
them to resolve conflict themselves conflict have emerged. These
internally and at an earlier stage. include the national studies of
In general, employers seem only the 2011 Workplace Employment
partly prepared for such a shift. Relations Study (van Wanrooy
The great majority of employers et al 2013) and the 2012 Skills
have written policies for grievance and Employment Survey (see, for
and discipline procedures (89% example, Gallie et al 2013, Green
for each of these – Wood et al et al 2013) as well as a growing
2014). But there seems to be an body of research into workplace
over-reliance on these procedural mediation (see, for example,

4   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
Bennett 2014, Saundry et al 2014). disputes and incidents of conflict. The survey was conducted by
The CIPD has also published a This could include significant YouGov on behalf of the CIPD as
second edition of its guide to clashes or unworkable relationships part of the spring 2014 Employee
mediation with Acas (CIPD 2013b). that arise from performance or Outlook using an online interview
absence management, for example, administered to members of the
The current report forms part of an and which may not be picked up YouGov Plc GB panel of more
ongoing CIPD research programme by standard conflict resolution than 350,000 individuals. The
that aims – given the contextual procedures. sample was selected and weighted
changes described above – to to be representative of the UK
shed further light on the current Relating this to other established workforce in relation to sector and
state of play of workplace conflict. concepts, our survey emphasised size (private, public, voluntary),
Our focus is individual conflict, relationship conflict, which Jehn industry type and full-time/part-
in other words that which occurs and Mannix (2001) describe as time working by gender. Profile
between individuals, as opposed to ‘interpersonal incompatibilities’ characteristics are normally derived
institutional or collective conflict. involving ‘tension and friction … from census data or, if not available
and feelings such as annoyance, from the census, from industry-
In this report, we present findings frustration, and irritation’. To a accepted data.
from a survey of UK employees’ lesser extent, we also look at
experiences of workplace conflict. problems rooted in task conflict – in Scope and limitations of the survey
Separately, we are also publishing other words, clashes of viewpoints The survey returned 2,195
a report looking at employers’ or opinions on what to do – and responses. 750 of these
attitudes and approaches to process conflict – disagreements respondents reported having had
individual conflict and how these about how to complete a task – an isolated dispute or incident of
may be changing in response to which as noted by Behfar et al conflict and/or an ongoing difficult
recent legislation (CIPD 2015). (2011) to some extent overlap. relationship at work in the previous
Following these, we will be However, we maintain a focus on 12 months and then went on to
undertaking research into the skills conflict that becomes problematic, answer a series of questions about
required by line managers and as opposed to the low levels of the conflict they had experienced.
supporting HR professionals if they task and process conflict that can For the majority of this survey
are to build healthy and robust equate to creative tension (Jehn report, we focus on the experiences
teams, and head off and resolve and Mannix 2001). of this subset.
workplace conflict when it arises.
We also focus primarily on To make the survey manageable for
How does this survey individual conflict, as opposed to people who experienced conflict
conceptualise conflict? collective or ‘industrial’ disputes, with more than one person, we
In looking at employees’ first- or team or group conflict. Thus, we focused the majority of questions
hand experiences, the current look at one-to-one relationships on what we described as: the most
report attempts to avoid pigeon- and interactions and the impact of serious problem (for example with
holing workplace conflict. This conflict on individuals’ well-being, the greatest consequences for
is in line with recent thinking, performance and employment. This those affected or the organisation).
which maintains that the available contrasts to work focused on group Each respondent was thus asked
channels for resolving workplace dynamics and team performance to consider this single case when
conflict – in particular employment (Jehn and Mannix 2001, Jehn et al answering the questions about
tribunals – constrain how it is 2010, Lencioni 2002). the nature of the conflict and
framed and understood (Saundry the course it took. This means
et al 2014). We are in danger Research method that most of our data is, strictly
of artificially labelling conflict, Overview speaking, not representative
for example as bullying and The survey that forms the basis of all interpersonal conflict we
harassment, when the real picture of this report was conducted experience at work. However, as
is more nuanced. in March 2014, that is, before discussed in Section 1, relatively
the introduction of Acas’s Early few respondents reported more
Thus, the survey took a broad Conciliation service but well after than one incident in our survey, so
concept of workplace conflict the introduction of employment we can be confident of providing
to include ongoing difficult tribunal fees. an accurate picture overall.
relationships, as well as isolated

5   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
The strength of this survey is Section 1 looks at the overall Section 7 with a look at the extent
in its focus on the nature of incidence of workplace conflict, to which conflict is resolved and
conflict and how it is dealt with giving an idea of its seriousness what factors appear to influence
inside the organisation. It gives and looking at how it differs this, and in the closing section, we
a representative view of how UK between organisations and summarise our conclusions.
employees experience conflict at individuals. Section 2 looks at who
work and how this conflict plays the reported conflict is with and, Additional tables showing our
out within the organisation. following this, Section 3 looks at analysis can be seen in the
what issues the conflict focused on. accompanying Appendix.
A limitation is that we do not
investigate group dynamics of In Section 4, we look at the
conflict, instead focusing the behaviour that is seen to be
respondent on the main person manifest in conflict, followed
with whom he or she had conflict. in Section 5 by the impact that
The survey is also weak on the employees report it had. Within
use of legal processes and of these, we examine a range of
alternative dispute resolution contextual factors that relate
(ADR) such as mediation, for which to conflict behaviour, consider
we record very low numbers. Nor perception gaps between parties
do we go into depth on employers’ involved in conflict, and look
approaches to conflict resolution, at factors that help explain the
as this is covered in the companion extent to which conflict affects
report (CIPD 2015). the individuals concerned and the
employment relationship.
Question wording
Note that throughout the report, Section 6 looks at the range of
we use italics to denote specific ways people respond when they
wording used in the survey find themselves in conflict at work,
questions. in particular how they attempted
to resolve it. We also look at how
Overview of report organisations and line managers
This report is structured to help or hinder employees in conflict
trace the different stages of at work towards resolution, and
development of workplace conflict. how responses vary with different
Thus, following this introduction, types of conflict. This is followed in

6   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
1 The scale of workplace conflict

How widespread is workplace We tend to be fairly selective in Employee perceptions on how

conflict? identifying conflict, with relatively common conflict is in their
Our survey finds that nearly small numbers reporting more than organisations vary a good deal.
four in ten UK employees (38%) one dispute or difficult relationship. There is a general tendency to
report some form of interpersonal This may be because in and of think it is not commonplace, but it
conflict at work in the last year. themselves, we do not consider is nonetheless significant that one
This includes an isolated dispute most clashes to be serious enough in four UK employees considers
or incident of conflict (29% of to warrant labelling them ‘conflict’. conflict a common occurrence in
UK employees reporting at least However, it may also be that we their organisations.
one case) and ongoing difficult focus on the most significant or
relationships (28%). most recent clash, and under- This should also be seen in the
report others. context that recent data has found
a rise in workplace conflict (CIPD
2011) and in fear of discrimination
or victimisation (Gallie et al 2013,
Figure 1: UK employees reporting workplace conflict in the last 12 months (%) Saundry et al 2014).

Isolated dispute or incident of conflict Ongoing difficult relationship

5 3 4 2

23 Incidents
22
0

2
71 72
more than 2

n=2,193 n=2,193

Figure 2: ‘Conflict in my workplace is a common occurrence’ (UK employees) (%)

5 20 22 29 19 4

n=2,195

Strongly agree Disagree

Agree Strongly disagree

Neither agree nor disagree Don’t know

7   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
What do we mean by In the majority of our analysis, we treatment, incivility and disrespect.
‘conflict’? do not distinguish between isolated Interestingly, though, it is the
For employees’ own experience disputes and ongoing difficult reverse of the most recent figures
of conflict, which forms the main relationships. Rather, we focus on stoppages resulting from
focus of this research, we are on the most serious problem (see disputes, which are now slightly
talking about incidents and difficult below), which could be either or more prevalent in the private
relationships that vary in the both. sector, although the number of
seriousness of their implications. working days lost remains higher in
Generally, though, what employees Organisational and individual the public sector (ONS 2014). But
are prepared to label conflict often differences clearly, interpersonal conflict is not
has a tangible impact on those Sector the same as collective industrial
concerned, but rarely escalates to Employees are more likely to say disputes, which are the cause of
drastic levels. they have experienced conflict in most stoppages.
the last year if they work in public
To give a more concrete idea of sector organisations (excluding Our findings should also be seen
this, in terms of behaviour, most publicly owned corporations) or alongside evidence that shows that
respondents citing conflict in the the voluntary sector. Respectively, conflict is dealt with differently
last year report a lack of respect 45% and 44% of these employees in the public sector. For example,
(61%) but very few report physical report some form of conflict in analysis of the 2011 Workplace
threat (3%) or physical assault (1%). the last year, compared with 31% Employment Relations Study
Similarly, regarding outcomes, the of private sector employees. This (WERS) shows that grievance and
conflict is seen to lead to a drop difference lessens but remains discipline procedures are more
in motivation or commitment two statistically significant looking only common in the public sector
times out of five (39%). In one in at very large organisations, which (Wood et al 2014). In short, sectoral
ten cases, relationships become includes the great majority of differences may be as much due to
unworkable to the extent that public sector bodies.1 the different nature of conflict as
one of the parties either changes the incidence of conflict.
job roles (5%), resigns (4%) or is In support of this view, conflict
dismissed (1%). is perceived to be more common Organisation size
in the public than private or More influential than sector is
We discuss the behaviour reported voluntary sectors: 31% of public organisational size. Whereas more
and impact of conflict more fully in sector employees agreed that than a quarter of employees in
Sections 4 and 5. conflict is a common occurrence medium or large organisations
at their workplaces, compared (28%) think conflict is common,
Isolated disputes versus with 24% of those working in the the same is true for 19% in small
ongoing difficult relationships private sector and 25% of voluntary organisations (10–49 employees)
The distinction between isolated sector employees. However, while and 16% in micro organisations
incidents of conflict and ongoing there is a difference in perception (fewer than ten employees). Again,
difficult relationships seems to between public and private sectors this is in line with research by Fevre
be useful, with most employees overall, comparing like with like in et al (2012) and is closely linked to
identifying either one or the other organisation size (that is, looking the fact that small organisations
for specific people. For example, at 500+ employees only), this generally take less formal
focusing on conflict with colleagues difference becomes statistically approaches to employee relations
in one’s team, less than one in insignificant. (Forth et al 2006).
three respondents (28%) report
both an incident of conflict and an Our evidence for more conflict in We can speculate as to why
ongoing difficult relationship, with the public sector is in line with this may be the case. In small
the clear majority reporting just the research by Fevre et al (2012), organisations there may be a
former (31%) or the latter (41%). which focuses on unfair stronger need for people to get on

1 In organisations with 500 or more employees, 38% of private sector employees report having had some kind of conflict in the last year, compared with 45% of
public sector employees.

8   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
 with each other, as it is harder to Gender research on WERS 2011 (Wood
avoid colleagues. There may also Overall, we find no significant et al 2014) that dismissals and
be less tension over competing difference in the proportion of disciplinary sanctions are rarer
resources and agendas in small men and women who report in organisations where more
organisations, if there are fewer experiencing conflict in the last women are employed. These are
business units with potentially year. However, men are slightly more likely when ill feeling has
divergent priorities. more likely than women to say boiled over into overt clashes and
they have had an isolated dispute become manifest in behaviour that
It is interesting to note at what (27% compared with 23%), as can more easily be pinpointed as
point the greatest shifts occur. distinct from an ongoing difficult unacceptable.
The clearest differences are not relationship. This is particularly
between medium and large the case with people they line-
organisations, or even small and manage (4% compared with 2%)
medium, but between micro and colleagues elsewhere in the
organisations and anything larger. organisation (7% compared with
We explore this further in Section 6. 4%). This would seem to add to

Figure 3: Employees who reported any conflict in the last year, by organisational size (%)

Micro,fewer
Micro, <10 employees (N=300)
than 10 employees 26

Small, 10–49 employees

Small, (N=288)
10–49 employees 40

Medium,Medium, 50–249 employees

50–249 employees (N=250) 38

Large, 250–499
Large, 250–499 employees
employees (N=113) 54

Very500+
Very large, large,employees
500+ empoloyees
(N=1133) 41

9   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
2W
 hich relationships are most prone
to conflict?

We find that conflict is most This difference is exaggerated

common with one’s line manager, when one looks at the impact the
followed by colleagues in conflict has. Firstly, as shown in
one’s team and elsewhere in Figure 4, the most serious cases of
the organisation, followed by conflict that we asked respondents
people who one’s line manager to focus on are disproportionately
reports to. In short and perhaps identified as ones with managers.
unsurprisingly, conflict is most Secondly, as discussed in Section
common with the people we 5, the negative impact of conflict
work most closely with, and less on factors like motivation or
frequent with people it is generally commitment is significantly greater
easier to avoid. when it is with our superiors.

There are clear perception gaps For the remainder of our analysis,
and power dynamics in workplace when we look at the characteristics
conflict. On the grounds that it and progression of conflict
‘takes two to tango’, one could according to who the conflict is
logically expect that employees are with, we use a more manageable
at least as likely to report having group of four categories. Thus, we
had conflict with someone they look at conflict with:
line-manage (assuming they do
have this responsibility) as with a • a line manager or other superior
line manager; more likely if we take (36% of cases)
into account that line managers on • colleagues inside the
average have more than one direct organisation (36%)
report. But that is not borne out • direct or indirect reports – that
by our survey. Rather, employees is, people who we line-manage
are much more likely to perceive personally and people who they
conflict with their superiors than in turn line-manage (10%)
their juniors. • people outside the organisation
(18%).

10   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
Figure 4: Incidence of conflict and ‘most serious conflict’, by relationship (%) 54 65

62

25
24

Who employees have had conflict with

20 in the last year*

Which of these conflicts was the

18 most serious**

15
14

10
10 9

6
5
4

2
0.5 2
1
0
to

**

k)

e
m

**

w
n

nt

r
so

ie

ov
tio
tio

rt*

no
rt*
a

or
ie
ts

pl
vi

te

ab
cl

isa
isa
or

tw
po

tk
po

up
r
pe

y
p

or

e
an
n

n’
m

re

re

S
a
re

th
ga
su

Do
er

rg
in

ct

ct
er

l
or

of
hi
om
or

ro
re

re
ue
ag

(w

ne
y

Di

di
er

he
st
ag

m
an

In

No
ag

ic
Cu

ot
le

in
m

bl
an

an
l
Co

pu
re
e

m
lin

he

in
he
e
y

ue
lin
m

ft
se

ag
ro
y
ne

el
M

lle
be
eo

ue

Co
em
m

ag
So

le

M
l
Co

* UK employees – includes isolated dispute or incident of conflict and/or ongoing difficult relationship n=2,193
** UK employees who have experienced conflict in the last year n=854
*** Figures for managerial positions only

11   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
3 What issues spark conflict?

Of course, conflict can be as varied of disagreement as issues that can Common issues in different
and complex as the relationships be resolved without the tension relationships
we have with colleagues. It focuses escalating. What problems arise most often
on a wide range of issues and in different relationships? There
often has its roots in more than However, conflict is unlikely to be are some predictable associations
one. Our survey asked respondents only down to personality clashes, here. In particular, conflict within
about a range of potential issues and we also support an issue- the line management hierarchy –
or causes of conflict and asked based view of conflict. The other that is, either a direct or indirect
them to give their own description. common contributors are individual boss or report – is much more
performance and target-setting; likely to focus on contracts of
The survey finds that by a clear and what may be the flipside to employment, agreeing deliverables
margin, the single most common this, namely the level of support we and setting targets, or absence and
cause or contributor is differences enjoy in our job or the resources absence management.
in personality or styles of working. we have at our disposal. This broad
At source this may be because we area of performance and resources More specifically, those in conflict
fail to understand difference, or it is far more likely to cause conflict with a boss are much more likely
may simply be a frustration with than factors such as employment to see the focus of conflict as
or dislike of a colleague’s style, or contracts or promotions. promotion or frame it in terms of
it may be historic, having roots in levels of support or resources.
past behaviour that has caused hurt However, this is not to say that
or created grudges. Regardless, these issues cause the most Conflict between colleagues not
it supports a relational view of serious conflict. As discussed in a line management relationship
conflict and highlights that it cannot further in Section 5, it is conflict are most likely to be seen to have
simply be viewed as, for example, a focused on promotion, contracts roots in differences in personality or
question of conflicts of interest. If it and terms and conditions (T&Cs) styles of working, but interestingly
were not for the strongly relational and absence that we are most are also slightly more likely to
aspect, people may well see points likely to find demotivating. be framed in terms of individual
competence or performance.

Figure 5: Issues the most serious incident of conflict focused on (%)

Differences in personality or styles of working 44

Individual competence or performance 33

Level of support or resources 23

Agreeing deliverables or setting targets 18

Contract of employment/terms and conditions 10

Absence or absence management 8

Promotion 4

Other 18
n=750

12   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
4 How do people behave in conflict?

In this section we look at the

behaviour manifest in workplace
It is not surprising that disrespect
comes top in the list of complaints,
‘The most common
conflict. This is more similar to as it is a very generic term. Aside negative behaviour
the focus of ill-treatment, such as from this, we find a wide spread
incivility and violence, described of reported behaviours, with one reported in
in Fevre et al’s (2012) Trouble at in four respondents reporting
Work. each of bullying, intimidation or conflict is a lack
The most common negative
harassment and refusal to work
together or co-operate; and about
of respect, which
behaviour reported in conflict
is a lack of respect, which our
one in four reporting each of
shouting or heated arguments and
our respondents
respondents perceived in a clear verbal abuse or insult. perceived in a clear
majority of cases. This could
largely be the cause of conflict – a At the more extreme end, we find majority of cases.’
moment when we let our guard that 1 in 25 employees who report
down and say something uncivil conflict in the last year say they
that we may regret – or more a have suffered physical threat or
manifestation of the conflict – the physical abuse while at work. This
moment we decide we’ve had translates to 1.4% of all employees
enough of someone and tension in our UK sample, more than
boils over. Either way, as with the 1 in 100, a figure many may find
prominence of personality clashes surprisingly high. However, as we
discussed in Section 3, it highlights now discuss, we should be careful
how failing to relate to each other about drawing conclusions before
as individuals in a healthy way is a we consider the context of these
major aspect of conflict. cases.

Figure 6: Perceived behaviour in workplace conflict (%)

75

61

27 25 22 22
19
13
Experienced oneself 8
6 6 5
Reported by other party
ct

lt
t

ts

e
e
en

ov
su
at
pe

en
er
m

in

ab
s

m
re

ss

op

or

n=750
gu

e
ra
of

o-

th
e
ar
ha

s
rc
ck

of
bu
ed
or
La

ro

ne
la
at
n

No
ba
he
io

th
at

r
ge

or

Ve
id

to

g
im

in
k
nt

ut
or
i

o
w
g,

Sh
to
in
lly

al
Bu

us
f
Re

13   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
 Contextual differences in 2, namely: one’s boss or other Lack of respect and bullying
conflict behaviour superior; a direct or indirect Our analysis finds that we are most
We now look at contextual report; a colleague, either in likely to perceive a lack of respect,
differences that help us understand the same team or elsewhere or bullying and harassment, from
people’s behaviour in conflict. In in the organisation (but not our boss or other superiors. This
particular, we tested for differences someone in a line management highlights the role that the power
in the behaviour that employees relationship); and anyone external differential can play in how we
reported according to who they to the organisation, be they client, experience interpersonal conflict,
were in conflict with. To conduct supplier, partner/colleague or as well as the importance of
this analysis, we used the four member of the public. conflict management skills for line
categories discussed in Section managers (see also Section 6).

Figure 7: Behaviour experienced by employees in conflict, according to who the conflict was with (%)

A lack of respect Bullying, intimidation Refusal to work together

or harassment or co-operate
71 44
63
60

31
41
39
20
16
24
19
13

Conflict with...
r

r
ue

ts ue

ue
e

e
n

n*

n*
io

io

io
ga me
m

m
tio
er

er

er
tio

tio
ag

ag

ag
to

to
sa
up

up

up
to
le

le

le
sa

sa
ni
ts

ts
l

l
rs

rs

rs
ni

ni
co

co

co
ga
or

or

ga
or
o

o
a

a
p

p
or
ss

ss

ss
p

or

or
re

re
re
bo

bo

bo
e

e
ho

ho
id

ho

id

id
ts
a

a
w

w
ts

ts
w
ou

ou

ou
ne

ne
ne
ne
eo

eo
ne

ne
eo
eo
m

m
eo

eo
m

Shouting or heated Verbal abuse or insult

so

so
m

so

m
so

arguments
so

so

40

34

20 19 19
18 18
16

*Percentages not accurate

Conflict with... due to low cell count 2
r
r

rts ue
e

e*
e*

n
n

io
io

gu

tio
tio

m
m

er
er

ag
a

sa
sa

up
up

to
to

ne o re olle
ne o re olle

ni
ni

rs
rs

rts

ga
ga

c
c

o
o

po
po

a
a

or
or

ss
ss

bo
bo

e
e

id
id

ts
a
ts
a

h
h

w
w

ou
ou

ne
ne

eo
eo

eo
eo

m
m

m
m

so
so

so
so

2 Some percentages given in this report should be considered indicative not accurate, due to a low cell count (n).

14   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
We also tested for differences find that junior managers, who are
across personal characteristics often in the firing line of public-
‘We find that
of respondents. Bullying and
harassment is very clearly seen as
facing services, are more likely to
report physical threat or abuse
junior managers,
more common in the public sector than non-managers. who are often
than the private or voluntary.3
Seemingly related to this, it is also Thus, as striking as our finding is on in the firing line
reported more by women than the level of threatened and actual
men.4 This sectoral difference may physical abuse, the strong likelihood of public-facing
in part be a product of how conflict
is framed in organisations. In the
is that the perpetrator is someone
outside the organisation. As such, we
services, are more
public sector, with its stronger should avoid grand pronouncements likely to report
tradition of trade unionism and on the state of employee relations
employee rights, employees may within organisations. But this fact physical threat or
well identify with the phrase may not make it any more bearable
‘bullying and harassment’ more for the victim, so we can nonetheless abuse than non-
readily than their counterparts in
the private or third sectors would
flag up the level of overt aggression
as a serious concern.
managers.’
do. Thus, while the difference
appears stark, we may to some On the one hand, it has
extent be comparing apples and implications for how employers
pears and it is difficult to draw protect their people from those
concrete conclusions about bullying outside the organisation. For
being a particular problem in public example, public notices that
sector organisational culture. ‘violence and abuse towards our
staff will not be tolerated’ may
Refusing to work together seem unnecessary to many, but
Refusal to work together or they are clearly justified. This
co-operate is most commonly supports existing research on the
reported by people in conflict need to effectively protect staff
with their reports (either direct or from violence, for example in the
indirect reports) and colleagues healthcare (Zarola and Leather
(within or outside one’s team 2006) and in licensed and retail
but not in a line management settings (Gore et al 2009).
relationship). This can also be seen
to reflect power dynamics, as these On the other hand, there is a
are relationships in which we will flipside to this, as the members
generally be less able to influence of the public causing violence are
change without recourse to formal likely to be employees elsewhere.
procedures. It is thus not surprising Thus, there are ethical implications
that we resort to a form of for the standards of conduct
withdrawing from the relationship. that are set for employees in
dealing with people outside the
Overt aggression organisation. Employers will often
The more overt conflict behaviours not be aware of incidents where
are most often reported in conflict their employees are acting as
we have with people outside our members of the public rather than
organisation. This is true of verbal representatives of the organisation,
abuse, shouting (which is also but there is still a moral case for
more commonly reported by men5) employers to use their influence
and physical threat or abuse. Likely to curb aggressive behaviour from
related to the last of these, we also employees wherever they can.

3 This difference between private and public sectors holds when we only look at the largest organisations with 500 or more employees.
4 We find women statistically more likely to report bullying than men overall, but the difference becomes insignificant when we look within the public and
private sectors.
5 26% of men reporting conflict say that they have experienced shouting or heated arguments, compared with 17% of women.

15   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
Perception gaps are especially subjective labels proposes that we are consistently
It is interesting to note the marked – in other words less objectively more favourable in interpreting
differences in conflict behaviour observable – and we will often be our own behaviour than that of
that we report about the other relatively unaware of the other other people. It is also a worrying
person and what we believe they party’s experience of conflict. sign, given that research by Jehn
have experienced or claimed about et al (2010) has demonstrated
ourselves. Logically, given an But the general difference that ‘conflict asymmetry’ within
unbiased appraisal based on full is consistent across all the groups (differences in perceptions
knowledge of the situation, one could categories we listed, including of conflict) decreases performance
expect equal figures of, for example, more observable behaviours such and creativity. In short, perception
whether you shouted at your as refusal to work together or gaps highlight that conflict is
colleague or she shouted at you. shouting. Thus as well as a lack dysfunctional.
of awareness in what has been
The differences are particularly reported by the other party in The findings also have an
large when it comes to lack of conflict, the data highlights how implication for how we use this
respect, harassment and verbal we do not always notice our own survey data. Specifically, data
abuse, for which we are five actions. based on employees’ views of
times more likely to report for the other party’s experiences of
ourselves than the other party. This This finding is in line with the conflict should not be treated as
is perhaps not surprising. They theory of attribution bias, which reliable.

Figure 8: Behaviour experienced by employees in conflict,

according to sector (%)

68 67

59

42

23 24

Private sector

Public sector

Voluntary sector
ct

t
en
e
sp

m
re

ss
ra
of

ha
ck

or
La

n
io
at
id
im
int
g,
in
lly
Bu

16   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
 5 The impact of conflict

The most common impact of

conflict is that people find it
or other party either changes job
roles, resigns or (less commonly) is
‘The most common
stressful, closely followed by a dismissed. Overall, someone leaves impact of conflict
drop in motivation or commitment, their job one way or another in one
each of which was reported in in ten cases (9%) of what we are is that people find
two out of five cases. Women are prepared to call conflict.
especially likely to say conflict has it stressful, closely
been a stressful experience, this
being reported in 47% of cases,
The chances of stress levels
escalating to a point where people
followed by a drop
compared with 38% for men. go off sick are smaller, at 1 in 20
cases of reported conflict.
in motivation or
One in seven cases (14%) of what commitment.’
we class as conflict is seen to Clearly, the greatest impact of
lead to a drop in productivity; conflict is on employee well-being.
the same is true for unworkable From an ethical perspective of
relationships. This gives us 5% of creating a healthy, positive working
all UK employees who report such environment, this is enough to
conflict in the previous year. warrant concerted efforts to find
faster, more effective routes to
It is also relatively common that conflict resolution.
relationships reach the point
where they are recognised to be When it comes to business
unworkable to the point where one outcomes, the more tangible

Figure 10: Perceived impact of conflict on either party (%)

Differences in personality or styles of working

Stress 43

A drop in competence
Individual motivation or
orcommitment
performance 39

A drop in productivity 14
Level of support or resources
Unworkable relationships 14
Agreeing deliverables or setting targets
Sickness absence 6

Formal
Contract of employment/terms disciplinary
and conditions 5

Changed job roles 5

Absence or absence management
Resigned from the job* 4
Promotion
Legal dispute* 2
Other
Dismissal* 1

Other 6
*Percentages not accurate
No impact 29 due to low cell count
n=750

17   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
impacts of conflict (such as moving Seniority and power dynamics they consider resolution. They also
jobs or sickness absence) are One striking finding is that the need to ensure that, as far as is
relatively uncommon. Nonetheless, impact of conflict on motivation or possible, their view of a satisfactory
the above figures highlight commitment is significantly greater outcome is shared by the more
the damage to organisations. when it is with our superiors. This junior party. As mentioned in
The common hit on employee is clearly a question of hierarchy: Section 4, perception gaps on the
commitment, motivation and well- when it is a superior of our own extent of conflict are a sign that it
being mark conflict as an important line manager it is worse still than if is dysfunctional and damaging to
business issue, albeit one that is it is our line manager her/himself. performance (Jehn et al 2010).
not always visible. The tangible This is the other major perception
damage that conflict is seen to gap, along with those mentioned Issues at the core of the
bring in reducing productivity and above on conflict behaviour. employment deal
making relationships unworkable Regarding the issues conflict
should certainly make it worthy of This finding also highlights the focuses on, we find it is disputes
attention. importance of line management over promotions, contracts and
skills in resolving conflict (see T&Cs, and absence that we most
What affects the impact of Section 6). Firstly, in having greater often find demotivating. Conflicts
conflict? influence, it reinforces the view that relating to performance and
We now analyse how the impact they need to take a lead in building resources are also more likely
of conflict varies across different robust, healthy relationships in than average to demotivate,
types of conflict. In doing this, the team. Secondly, if they are but markedly less so than these
we use the variable of ‘a drop in involved in disputes or difficult issues that cut to the core of the
motivation or commitment’ as a relationships with employees who employment deal.
generic indication that the conflict report into them, it is not good
has tangibly affected one or both enough for managers to simply
of the people involved. reach what, in their own eyes,

Figure 11: Cases of conflict that led to Figure 12: Cases of conflict that led to a drop in
a drop in motivation or commitment, motivation or commitment, according to issues or
according to who the conflict was with (%) causes of conflict (%)

Reduced motivation or commitment Reduced motivation or commitment

69 68
60
57
52
50 48
40

31

22

Conflict with... Conflict focused on...

r

ab s a nag on*
id rts ue

r s on nt

ce
ni e*

ns
n

or reso ts

rm s
co rio

rfo ce
tio

e
du el es o d c eme
or to m

an
m upp ttin itio
g

a oti
pe

nc t or arg

pe ur
po ea

sa

d
su

ce rom
l

t
l

g
ga
or

p
a
ss

e
e
e
bo

o r
ne o

ng me sen

e
ts
a

er m
h
m ew

ou

liv ter
ab

te
s
l
/
so on

of
pe
t
ag mp e or

n
eo
e
m

vi lev

co
c
so

re loy

de
of sen

al
ct ab

ei
e

di
in
ra
nt
co

*Percentages not accurate due to low cell count

18   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
This suggests that we place most
importance on the basics of
Conflict behaviour
Certain conflict behaviours are
‘What is at stake
the employment relationship –
favourable terms and conditions, a
notable for being more detrimental
to motivation or commitment.
is not only the
sense of progression and support In descending order, these technical aspects
when we are ill or cannot work are: bullying, intimidation or
for some other reason – and it is harassment; shouting or heated of employment
when these are threatened that
conflict is most likely to become
arguments; lack of respect; and
verbal abuse or insult. Two things
contracts, but the
serious. In short, what is at stake
is not only the technical aspects
stand out in this regard: firstly, the
persistence of negative behaviour
wider psychological
of employment contracts, but that is a hallmark of bullying; and contract that
the wider psychological contract secondly, the intensity and tone of
that underpins the employment exchanges, with shouting generally underpins the
relationship (see, for example, having a greater impact than
Conway and Briner 2005, Guest insults.
employment
and Conway 2002). relationship.’
However, taking another indicator
of the seriousness of conflict,
namely deciding to look for a
new job, it is cases rooted in
personality clashes that also stand
out, alongside those focused on
contracts (see Section 6 below).

19   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
 6 Responding to conflict

In this section, we look at responses Exit strategy of how serious the employee
to conflict from two angles: firstly, The next most common is the considers the behaviour of the
from the point of view of individual exit strategy of looking for a new other party. However, it can also
employees as actors; and secondly, job, a course of action followed reflect how formal systems treat
considering the perceived level of by one in eight employees. A fifth different types of incident. For
support within the organisation for of this number actually left their example, procedures may be
resolving conflict. organisation as a result. This equates very clear that verbal abuse over
to 0.8% of all UK employees, or just a protected characteristic7 such
How do employees respond under 1 in 100. This is a relatively as race or sexual orientation is
to conflict? small figure compared with overall unacceptable, but employees may
levels of turnover, which the CIPD be less clear where they stand
Informal discussion measured at 11.9% in 2013.6 However, when facing abuse on the basis
By far the most common response as discussed in Section 5, many of of their socio-economic class. If
is an informal approach, discussing the business costs of conflict are people do not see their particular
the matter with one’s manager, harder to quantify. issues reflected in formal conflict
HR personnel or the other person. resolution structures, they may feel
We also frequently look to friends Formal procedures deterred from escalating them,
and family to lend us an ear – in Slightly less frequently (one even if they personally feel they
particular women, who are almost in ten cases) employees use are very important.
twice as likely to do this than their organisation’s formal
men – although as discussed in grievance, discipline or complaints ‘I didn’t do anything – I just let it go’
Section 7, this does not look like an procedures. Obviously, this A quarter of employees make
effective strategy in itself. decision can be a simple reflection no active response to conflict in

Figure 13: How employees responded to conflict (%)

Discussion with my manager and/or HR 37

Informal discussion with the other person 26

Discussion with someone outside of work
(for example, member of family or friend) 23

I decided to look for new job 12

Formal grievance, discipline or complaints
procedure 9
Discussion with an employee
representative or union official 8

I left the organisation* 2

*Percentages not accurate
Workplace mediation with a trained
mediator – provided by my employer* 1 due to low cell count
Workplace mediation with a trained
mediator – not provided by my employer* 0.4

I filed an employment tribunal* 0.2

Other 8

I didn’t do anything – I just let it go 25

n=750

6 This measurement uses the standard ‘crude wastage’ method to calculate median labour turnover (CIPD 2013a). This is a percentage based on the number of
employees leaving an organisation in a set period divided by the average number employed in total in the same period.
7 The full list of protected characteristics in the 2010 Equality Act is: age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and
maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, and sexual orientation (Acas 2014).

20   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
relationships, instead judging that who say that they have used Either way, it seems that while an
it isn’t worth the battle and simply mediation in the last year (CIPD increasing number of employers
‘letting it go’. Depending on the 2015). However, one would expect recognise in principle that
context and one’s point of view, a substantial difference in these mediation is a useful approach
this may reflect that the conflict is figures purely on the balance to be able to draw upon, they do
not very serious, or that the person of probability: the latter figures not make it sufficiently available
cannot find it within themselves represent any use of mediation and/or actively encourage its use
to face up to it. However, it should within the organisation and not (as within the organisation. This may
be noted that the majority of us the current survey indicates) the be because they do not consider
reporting conflict do make an use of mediation proportionate to that the negative business impacts
attempt of some sort to resolve the number of cases of conflict. of conflict are typically sufficient
the situation. to warrant the costs of mediation.
More pertinent is that we find that Alternatively, it may be due to a
Support for resolving conflict the 1.5% of cases of conflict receiving lack of awareness of the extent
We asked all employees in our mediation is far less than the of conflict: for example, that it is
sample – not only those who proportion of employees who would only when conflict escalates to a
had experienced interpersonal value it. Going to the entire UK serious level and one party raises
conflict in the previous year – a sample of employees, we found that a grievance that the HR function
series of questions on how their 46% believed that mediation was an realises there is a problem and can
organisations supported conflict effective approach to dealing with propose mediation.
resolution. workplace conflict and 13% were of
the view that they personally had We can expect this to change over
Mediation had a relationship that would have coming years. Our accompanying
As can be seen in Figure 12, just benefitted from mediation. That they research into employers’ attitudes
1.5% of employees who report don’t use mediation could be due to and approaches to conflict
conflict used mediation, most either not being aware it’s on offer, management (CIPD 2015) indicates
of which was provided by the not thinking of it at the time, not that many employers plan to make
employer. This is a far lower being referred to it, or not having more use of mediation and introduce
number than the 29% of employers access to it. it at an earlier stage in the conflict.

Figure 14: UK employee views on workplace mediation (%)

‘Mediation is an effective approach to help resolve workplace disputes’

8 38 28 7 3 17

‘I have had a difficult relationship at work that would have been helped by mediation’

2 11 23 27 25 11

Strongly agree Disagree

Agree Strongly disagree

Neither agree nor disagree Don’t know

n=2,195

21   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
‘Line managers Line management
We also asked employees across
one in five employees are of the
opinion that their line manager
play a central the whole sample how well their actively creates conflict.
line managers helped their teams
role in creating, avoid or resolve conflict. We Line managers play a central role
find that employees tend to be in creating, avoiding or resolving
avoiding or positive about their manager’s conflict. The 2011 WERS survey
resolving conflict.’ ability to build strong, healthy
team relationships, although there
finds that unfair treatment or poor
relationships with line managers
is a fairly broad spread of opinion is the single most commonly cited
on this. They are also typically trigger for employee grievances
positive, albeit less so, about line (Wood et al 2014). As well as
managers’ ability to resolve conflict lacking the skills to nip conflict
when it does occur in a swift and in the bud (CIPD 2015), line
effective way. And a clear majority managers are also seen to have
disagree with the statement a lack of confidence, fearing the
that their manager is a source of ramifications of making mistakes in
conflict in the team. conflict-handling, in particular the
risk of litigation (Latreille 2011).
However, there is no room for
complacency and a strong case Effective procedures
for developing management skills Views on organisational procedures
in building robust teams and for managing conflict are slightly
managing conflict. One in four more equivocal, with only slightly
employees do not think their line more employees agreeing
manager helps build good team that these are effective than
relationships; the same proportion disagreeing (30% compared with
do not think they manage conflict 27%). In general, opinion on this
well. And a worryingly common is also less sure, with more people

Figure 15: UK employee views on line managers’ roles in conflict (%)

‘My line manager helps the team build healthy relationships (for example positive, strong)’

8 28 32 17 9 6
n=2,195

‘If there is conflict in the team, my line manager helps resolve this effectively’

7 26 30 17 9 13
n=2,195

‘My line manager is a cause of conflict in the team’

6 14 20 29 27 5
n=2,092

Strongly agree Disagree

Agree Strongly disagree

Neither agree nor disagree Don’t know

22   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
 not knowing how good their How do responses differ with that they are far less likely to ‘just
organisation’s conflict management type of conflict? let it go’, far more likely to initiate
procedures are. This is not Returning to how people try to an informal discussion with the
surprising, as most employees will resolve conflict, we find differences other person or to use formal
not have had first-hand experience according to the type of conflict complaints procedures, and more
of these procedures. and the organisational context. likely to discuss the issue with their
own manager or HR.
Nonetheless, overall, UK employees Balance of power in the relationship
typically feel confident to raise How does an employee’s position On the other hand, employees in
issues in their organisations (45%, in the relationship affect how they conflict with their line manager or
compared with 28% who do not). respond to conflict? In line with our their line manager’s boss are far
Clearly we are not entirely reliant other findings, the differences here more likely to discuss the matter
upon systems and procedures again tell a story of the balance of with an employee representative or
for this. The wider organisational power in workplace relationships. union official or to decide to look
culture and our own ability to help On the one hand, managers in for a new job.
resolve issues also play a large part. conflict with their reports indicate

Figure 16: UK employee views on organisational support to resolve conflict (%)

‘My organisation has effective procedures for resolving interpersonal conflict’

6 24 26 18 9 16

‘I feel confident raising issues in my organisation’

10 36 23 20 8 4

Strongly agree Disagree

Agree Strongly disagree

Neither agree nor disagree Don’t know

n=2,195

Figure 17: Response to conflict, according to who the conflict was with (%)

Informal discussion with the Discussion with my manager I didn’t do anything – I just
other person and/or HR let it go
54

46
41

32 32
29
27 27
24 25
20*

8*

Conflict with... Conflict with... Conflict with...

le r

le r

le r
n

n
ga me

ga me

ga me
ue

ue

ts por gue
io

io

io
tio

tio

tio
er

er

er
ag

ag
e ts to

e ts to

e ts to
a
sa

sa

sa
up

up

up
ni

ni

ni
rs

rs

rs
l

l
co

co

co
or

or
o

o
a

a
or

or

or
p

p
ss

ss

ss
re

re

re
bo

bo

bo
id

id

id
ho

ho

ho
ts

ts

*Percentages not accurate

a

a
w

w
ou

ou

ou
ne

ne

ne

due to low cell count

ne

ne

ne
eo

eo

eo
eo

eo

eo
m

m
m

m
so

so

so
so

so

so

23   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
Focus of the conflict procedures. This is understandable, In particular, the type of behaviour
There are a number of statistically as these formal channels will not that stands out is bullying,
significant relationships between generally suit the more relational intimidation or harassment. In
the focus or perceived origin of cases, which are less clear cut and cases of conflict where this is
conflict and how people respond tangible. perceived, people are least likely
to it. Below we highlight the most to do nothing (let it go). They are
notable differences.8 However, on the other hand, also much more likely to discuss
employees also find disputes such cases with their line manager
Some issues we are markedly rooted in personality clashes or HR, an employee representative,
less likely to ‘just let go’, namely, among the most insurmountable: or a family member or friend,
contracts of employment or terms as noted above, in these conflicts and more likely to look for a new
and conditions, and individual we are substantially more likely to job. As mentioned in Section 5,
competence or performance. look for a new job. Yet it is clear a characteristic of bullying is the
we do want to talk about these persistent nature of the behaviour.
We are most likely to take a issues. We are slightly more likely It is this repeated and unfair
direct and informal approach, to discuss such cases of conflict singling out of themselves that we
discussing the issue with the directly with the other person can surmise prompts people into
other person, when the problem and much more likely to do so action.
focuses on individual competence with a friend or member of our
or performance, or (typically the family; although in and of itself, the Aside from this, another finding
flipside to this) levels of support or friends and family option is not an that stands out is that cases
resources. effective route to resolution (see involving verbal abuse or shouting
Section 7 below). Furthermore, it are much more likely to be
Formal grievance, discipline is worth reminding ourselves that referred to the formal channels
or complaints procedures are differences of personality are the of grievance and discipline.
most likely to be used in cases single most common cause that we This is understandable, as these
of absence management. There identified of conflict, being a factor behaviours are relatively easy to
are also various issues we are in 44% of cases. assess objectively.
substantially more likely to discuss
with an employee representative This has important implications Organisational factors
or union official – in descending for forms of alternative dispute affecting responses
order these include absence resolution (ADR) such as mediation
management, level of support or and facilitated discussions. In Organisational sector
resources, contracts of employment line with views on the usefulness Looking at broad sectors, we find
and promotion. and availability of mediation that public sector employees are
(see above), these findings point more likely both to approach an
Following through to a more to an unmet need for support employee representative and to
serious level of action, we are in resolving conflict informally, have used mediation. The former
most likely to decide to look for a person to person. Although formal is no surprise, given the stronger
new job when conflict focuses on channels remain a necessary tool presence of unions in the public
contracts of employment, followed and can be effective (see Section sector. The latter is interesting and
by personality clashes; and to 7), a great deal of conflict may be potentially an indication that the
some extent more likely to do so unsuited to these methods and the notion of using an independent
if it focuses on levels of support or cost – to the individuals involved trained mediator comes more
resources, or promotion. and the organisation – of not naturally to public sector
plugging this gap may be high. organisations.
There is an interesting mix of
tendencies regarding conflict Conflict behaviour These two findings may be
rooted in personality clashes. On There are also various significant related. A defining characteristic
the one hand, people are less relationships between what of mediation is that, in looking for
likely in these cases to resort to behaviour is reported in conflict win–win solutions, each party has
grievance, discipline or complaints and how people respond to it. an equal chance to talk through

8 It is worth noting the limitation of our data set here. The numbers of employees responding in certain ways, such as using mediation or filing employment
tribunals, are generally too small to find any significant relationships. It is thus likely that the relationships we focus on here are far from complete.

24   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
their experiences and put forward from their line managers and to and large organisations in this
their views. This disrupts to an some extent more likely to point respect.
extent the normal hierarchy in to ineffective line management
relationships where there is a clear responses. This may be more to In short, as organisations grow in
subordinate: managers, in short, do with cumbersome processes size, or we move to larger setups,
have to give up some of their usual than poor skills sets, as there is no it seems we are remarkably quick
prerogative (Saundry et al 2013). public/private difference between to become institutionalised in this
Thus, one can see why in unionised how well line managers are seen to respect. Whether it is because we
organisations, where open build healthy team relationships. feel penned in by organisational
negotiations between management processes or because we don’t
and employee representatives are Organisational size see enough gain to be had from
more common, there may be more We also find that employees taking an informal direct approach,
access to mediation or people may working in micro organisations (up it seems the structures of
be more open to trying it. to nine employees) are far more organisations quickly make us less
likely to discuss the matter with the social in how we deal with conflict.
A related reason may be the other person directly and less likely This would seem to underscore the
stronger tradition in the public to raise the issue with a manager case for mediation and facilitated
sector of taking a formal, quasi- or HR personnel. Thus, 42% of discussions as mechanisms for
judicial approach to employee employees experiencing conflict in facilitating person-to-person
relations problems (Saundry et al micro organisations tried resolving conversations that may not happen
2011) and in particular, as noted in it with an informal conversation otherwise.
Section 1, making greater use of with the other person, compared
grievance and discipline procedures with just a quarter of employees
(Wood et al 2014). Although (24%) in small, medium or large
mediation is sometimes described organisations.
as ‘informal’ dispute resolution, this
is only really true in comparison In line with this, employees in micro
with legal options. Compared with organisations are substantially
informal discussions, it follows more confident to raise issues in
a clear structure and process, their organisations. Further, there
so may seem less alien in public are less pronounced but similar
sector settings. Equally, with the organisational differences when
greater use of grievance and we look at the skillsets of line
discipline procedures, public sector managers: in micro organisations,
organisations may also be more they are less likely to be seen
aware of their limitations in certain as being poor at building strong
types of conflict (see above and teams or dealing with conflict.
Section 7) and thus more amenable
to trying mediation as an alternative This broad difference is no surprise,
or complementary route. given the more closely knit and
informal environments typical in
However, a readiness to try the smallest organisations. But it
mediation does not necessarily is interesting to note at what point
translate to effective conflict the change occurs; for example,
resolution. We also find that in how sharply the practice of sorting
general, public sector employees things out with an informal chat
have less confidence in their line dwindles. Already when one looks
managers to help them resolve at small organisations (10–49
conflict than their public sector employees), the likelihood of taking
counterparts.9 Public sector this simplest of approaches has
employees are particularly more almost halved; and there is no
likely to flag up slow responses difference between small, medium

9 This analysis controls for organisational size by looking only at those with 500 or more employees.

25   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
7 Finding resolution

Overall, our survey shows a very be resolved adequately are those some evidence contrary to the
even spread in the degree to relating to levels of support or argument, sometimes put forward
which our respondents reached a resources, followed by absence by advocates of mediation, that
resolution in their conflicts. We now or its management, contracts of the more formal procedures are
consider a range of factors that employment and differences in ineffective because they encourage
appear to influence this. personality or styles of working. parties to set battle lines, fostering
Conflict focused on promotion, a zero-sum game mentality and
Who the conflict was with targets and performance seems to making views more entrenched,
Overall, conflict is seen to be be easier to resolve in comparison. instead of encouraging a more
resolved most fully when it has balanced and positive win–win
been with people outside our Response to conflict outlook. There may be some
organisation. On the basis of our survey truth in this view, but our survey
findings, the best chance of underlines the importance of
Inside the organisation, the picture resolving conflict comes either providing formal approaches.10 Their
is all too familiar, speaking again when we informally discuss the merits – potentially providing a fair
of the role the power differential matter with the other person or process, redress for unfair treatment
plays in how conflict plays out. On when we use a formal grievance, and a degree of closure – should
average, we judge that conflict has discipline or complaints procedure. not be overlooked. The problem
been resolved most satisfactorily Respectively, 45% and 58% of is that they are clearly inadequate
when it was with someone who these cases are seen to be largely on their own and, as discussed in
reports to us, less so when it is or fully resolved, compared Section 6, may be largely irrelevant
a colleague, and less again when with 39% overall. While these in many types of conflict.
it is our line manager, or one of two approaches to dealing with
their bosses. disputes seem fields apart, they This is in line with other research
will often be used in very different that finds mediation and grievance
Focus of the conflict situations (see Section 6). and discipline procedures being
We find no obvious trends used in conjunction with each
overall in what types of issues But it is an important point that other, not only in a broad sense, as
tend to be resolved more fully. overall, the informal and formal approaches made available to give
Correlation analysis shows that approaches both have a clear place people different options to suit their
the cases of conflict least likely to in resolving conflict. This provides situation; but also specifically within

Figure 18: To what extent has the conflict or difficult relationship so far been resolved? (%)

17 21 19 22 20

Fully resolved Mainly not resolved

Largely, but not fully resolved Not at all resolved

Partly resolved

n=750

10 This is in line with Acas/CIPD guidance that argues that in some cases, formal procedures will be the only option (CIPD 2013b).

26   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
 a case of conflict, as approaches that conflict head on: it is not likely to go We don’t find a significant
can be used at different stages as away if we decide to do nothing and relationship between how fully
appropriate (CIPD 2013b, Saundry ‘let it go’. Interestingly, and perhaps conflict is resolved and whether
et al 2013). Thus, despite the label related to this, those who discussed mediation has been used, but this
of ‘alternative’ dispute resolution, the issue with a friend or family is not surprising considering the
mediation may be better thought of member outside of work were also small numbers who use it.
as being complementary to the more less likely to reach resolution. This
formal approaches such as grievance seems to play to the stereotype We draw out implications of these
and discipline procedures. of the English that they may often findings in the next and final
complain, but may not be so good section.
We also find evidence to suggest at directing complaints to the right
that we are better off dealing with people (Fox 2005).

Figure 19: Proportion of cases of conflict largely/fully resolved, according to who the conflict was with (%)

Conflict with...

a boss or superior 29

a colleague 37

someone who reports to me 49

someone outside organisation 59

Figure 20: Proportion of cases of conflict largely/fully resolved, according to how employees responded (%)

Informal discussion with the other person 45

Formal grievance, discipline or complaints procedure 58

Discussion with member of family or friend 29

I didn’t do anything – I just let it go 31

27   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
Conclusions

The scale of the problem support or resources, contracts of organisation. In line with this,
Workplace conflict is a major issue employment and promotion. men are also more likely to report
for organisations that should not shouting or heated arguments.
be brushed under the carpet. Both Power dynamics and
ongoing difficult relationships perception gaps On the other hand, bullying and
and isolated incidents of conflict Throughout this report, our harassment is more often reported
can have serious ramifications for findings highlight the influence by women, who are also more
employees’ personal well-being of power dynamics in workplace likely to report that conflict has
and morale, which has clear knock- conflict. If people are the been a stressful experience, and
on effects for the organisation more junior person in a work are twice as likely to discuss the
through demotivation, absence, relationship, they are more likely problem with family or friends.
unworkable relationships and to frame a difference of views as
people leaving the organisation; conflict; more likely to rate that Despite these differences in how
not to mention the management conflict as serious; and more conflict is manifest and dealt with,
and HR time it takes to help likely to report stress or being it must be said that at a macro
resolve disputes (CIPD 2011, 2015). demotivated as a result; and less level, the gender differences
likely to say that the conflict has are limited. Overall, women are
The basics and the been adequately resolved. just as likely as men to report
relationships interpersonal conflict, and we find
There are two broad areas that we The power dynamic has a very no significant difference between
need to focus on in understanding clear influence on how workplace how fully men and women judge
the impact of conflict and how it conflict is recognised and conflict to be resolved.
can be resolved. Firstly, the basics experienced. Comparing incidents
of the employment relationship: of conflict people have with their Organisational differences
T&Cs, support when we are ill, a line managers or others higher up Public sector organisations appear
sense of progression. Secondly, in the hierarchy with disputes or to fare worse, reporting more
the interpersonal relationships: the difficult relationships people have conflict and being less able to
differences and clashes in personality with a direct or indirect report, deal with it in a timely way. But
and working styles that create there are some very clear-cut the biggest difference across
tension and misunderstandings that findings. When we are the more organisations is in their size. In
can lead to conflict. junior party in conflict, we are more particular, it is micro organisations
likely to suffer adverse effects from with fewer than ten employees that
Both are important and have the conflict and less likely to judge deal with conflict more informally
serious ramifications, but our it has been resolved sufficiently. and more effectively. Even in small
evidence suggests that they We also approach the conflict organisations of 10–49 employees,
may need different strategies for differently, for example being less we find this more difficult.
resolution. Informal approaches are likely to use formal channels such
seen to work better when there is as grievance and discipline. It seems that organisational
a personality clash, or when the complexity and structures that
problem focuses on individual Gender differences develop as organisations grow in
performance or levels of support We also find some interesting size very quickly get in the way
or resources. Formal grievance, differences in the experiences of resolving conflict swiftly. One
discipline or complaints procedures of conflict reported by men and implication of this is that many of
are most likely to be used in women. Men are more likely to report our organisations are less social
cases of absence management. having had an isolated dispute (as and we are less able to have open
Employee representatives are opposed to a difficult relationship), and frank conversations to resolve
most often used in conflict about especially with their direct reports our differences than we might like
absence management, level of and colleagues elsewhere in the to think.

28   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
In search of solutions look for a new job. We need to A decade or two ago, when
Approaches such as mediation support line managers to build business coaching was still
or facilitated discussions may be healthy, robust team environments relatively uncommon, it invariably
more necessary than we realise: we in which individual differences are meant setting up a series of
need practical support to deal with at least respected, if not positively organised sessions with an external
conflict directly and effectively. Our appreciated,11 and disagreements can coach consultant. This still happens
survey backs up this view. While be expressed safely. now, of course, but alongside this,
only 1.5% of employees reported we also talk about developing
using mediation to help resolve Mediation and arbitration are a ‘coaching culture’ in an
conflict, many more are of the view typically referred to as forms of organisation and of line managers
that not only is it a valuable tool, alternative dispute resolution ‘drawing on coaching behaviours’
but also that they personally would (ADR). They are indeed an as part of a core skillset.
have benefitted from mediation. alternative to the more formal and
legal processes, but employers A similar shift in expectations
This does not mean that grievance may do better to think of them as and practice needs to happen in
and discipline procedures do not complementary, working alongside conflict resolution. Far from being
work. Indeed, we find evidence that grievance and disciplinary action. If a bolt-on that is only ever led by
overall, these more formal channels employers are to effectively resolve independent external mediators,
have as big an impact in helping the gamut of workplace clashes, the methods of alternative dispute
resolve conflict as sorting things disputes and difficult relationships resolution should also make up part
out directly with the other person. in-house, they should make a of the required skillset of the well-
But they are clearly insufficient collective suite of approaches rounded line manager. There will
and our data is consistent with available to employees. Relying always be a place for independent
the view that they do not help in solely on traditional channels and mediators or arbitrators, but we
many types of conflict. In many not actively promoting approaches also need to enhance the ability
situations, a system that relies on such as mediation risks having a of our workforces to engage in
grievance and discipline procedures serious blind spot. informal conversations to resolve
alone will do little good, as it will or contain low-level conflict
simply mean that conflict festers But this should not simply be a before it gets out of hand. This
until it escalates to a serious level. case of ‘bolting on’ mediation, for – in particular the focus on line
example by bringing in external management skills – will be a
In particular, conflict that has roots in providers. The role of the line central theme in our next research
personality clashes stands out in this managers in responding to conflict project on workplace conflict.
regard. The scale and seriousness of in a timely, informal way is crucial,
this type of conflict is highlighted by in particular in the context of
our findings that it is the single most responsibilities being devolved
common issue or cause of conflict from central HR functions (CIPD
at work, and that it’s particularly 2015, Saundry and Wibberley
likely to prompt employees to 2012).

11 This has been argued to be the most business-relevant interpretation of workforce diversity (Lines and Hamill 2008).

29   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
References

ACAS. (2014) The Equality Act CHARTERED INSTITUTE OF FORTH, J., BEWLEY, H. and
2010: guidance for employers PERSONNEL AND DEVELOPMENT. BRYSON, A. (2006) Small and
[online]. London: Acas. Available (2013b) Mediation: an approach to medium-sized enterprises:
at: http://acas.ecgroup.net/ resolving workplace issues [online]. findings from the 2004 Workplace
Publications/Equality.aspx Guide. London: CIPD. Available at: Employment Relations Survey.
[Accessed 9 March 2015]. http://www.cipd.co.uk/publicpolicy/ London: Department of Trade and
policy-reports/mediation- Industry.
ACAS. (2013) Settlement resolving-issues.aspx [Accessed
agreements: a guide [online]. 9 March 2015]. FOX, K. (2005) Watching the English:
London: Acas. Available at: http:// the hidden rules of English behaviour.
acas.ecgroup.net/Publications/ CHARTERED INSTITUTE OF London: Hodder and Stoughton.
Settlementagreements.aspx PERSONNEL AND DEVELOPMENT.
[Accessed 9 March 2015]. (2013c) Real-life leaders: closing GALLIE, D., FELSTEAD, A. and
the knowing–doing gap [online]. GREEN, F. (2013) Fear at work
BEHFAR, K., MANNIX, E. and Research report. London: CIPD. in Britain: first findings from the
PETERSON, R. (2011) Conflict in Available at: http://www.cipd. Skills and Employment Survey 2012
small groups: the meaning and co.uk/hr-resources/research/real- [online]. London: Centre for Learning
consequences of process conflict. life-leaders.aspx [Accessed and Life Chances in Knowledge
Small Group Research. Vol 42, 9 March 2015]. Economies and Societies, Institute of
No 2, April. pp127–176. Education. Available at: http://www.
CHARTERED INSTITUTE OF cardiff.ac.uk/socsi/ses2012/[hidden]
BENNETT, T. (2014) The role of PERSONNEL AND DEVELOPMENT. resources/4.%20Fear%20at%20
workplace mediation: a critical (2011) Conflict management Work%20Minireport.pdf [Accessed
assessment. Personnel Review. [online]. Survey report. London: 9 March 2015].
Vol 43, No 5. pp764–779. CIPD. Available at: http://www.
cipd.co.uk/hr-resources/survey- GIBBONS, M. (2007) Better dispute
CHARTERED INSTITUTE OF reports/conflict-management.aspx resolution: a review of employment
PERSONNEL AND DEVELOPMENT. [Accessed 9 March 2015]. dispute resolution in Great Britain.
(2015, forthcoming) Conflict London: Department of Trade and
management: a shift in direction? CONWAY, N. and BRINER, Industry.
London: CIPD. R. (2005) Understanding
psychological contracts at work: GORE, J., BESWICK, J. and ROGERS,
CHARTERED INSTITUTE OF a critical evaluation of theory and K. (2009) A literature review of
PERSONNEL AND DEVELOPMENT. research. Oxford: Oxford University effective management of the risk
(2013a) Resourcing and talent Press. of violence in licensed and retail
planning [online]. Annual survey premises arising from crime and
report. London: CIPD. Available FEVRE, R., LEWIS, D. and disorder [online]. Research Report,
at: http://www.cipd.co.uk/ ROBINSON, A. (2012) Trouble at No RR698. London: Health and
binaries/resourcing-and-talent- work. London: Bloomsbury. Safety Executive. Available at: http://
planning_2013.PDF [Accessed www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrpdf/
9 March 2015]. rr698.pdf [Accessed 9 March 2015].

30   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
GREEN, F., FELSTEAD, A. and GALLIE, OFFICE FOR NATIONAL VAN WANROOY, B., BEWLEY, H.
D. (2013) Job-related well-being in STATISTICS. (2014) Labour and BRYSON, A. (2013) The 2011
Britain: first findings from the Skills disputes: annual article, 2013 Workplace Employment Relations
and Employment Survey 2012 [online]. [online]. London: Office for Study: first findings [online].
London: Centre for Learning and Life National Statistics. Available London: Department for Business,
Chances in Knowledge Economies at: http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/ Innovation and Skills. Available at:
and Societies, Institute of Education. dcp171766_371313.pdf [Accessed https://www.gov.uk/government/
Available at: http://www.llakes.org/ 9 March 2015]. publications/the-2011-workplace-
wp-content/uploads/2013/05/6.-Job- employment-relations-study-wers
related-Well-being-in-Britain-mini- SAUNDRY, R., LATREILLE, P. and [Accessed 9 March 2015].
report.pdf [Accessed 9 March 2015]. DICKENS, L. (2014) Reframing
resolution: managing conflict and WOOD, S., SAUNDRY, R. and
GUEST, D.E. and CONWAY, N. resolving individual employment LATREILLE, P. (2014) Analysis
(2002) Pressure at work and the disputes in the contemporary of the nature, extent and impact
psychological contract. London: workplace [online]. Acas Policy of grievance and disciplinary
Chartered Institute of Personnel Discussion Papers. London: Acas. procedures and workplace
and Development. Available at: http://www.acas.org. mediation using WER S2011
uk/media/pdf/6/9/reframing_ [online]. Research Paper, No
JEHN, K. and MANNIX, E. (2001) policy_paper_FINAL.pdf [Accessed 10/14. London: Acas. Available at:
The dynamic nature of conflict: a 9 March 2015]. http://www.acas.org.uk/media/
longitudinal study of intragroup pdf/2/d/1014-WERS2011-analysis-
conflict and group performance. SAUNDRY, R., JONES, C. and D-and-G-procedures-workplace-
Academy of Management Journal. ANTCLIFF, V. (2011) Discipline, mediation.pdf [Accessed 9 March
Vol 44, No 2, April. pp238–251. representation and dispute 2015].
resolution: exploring the role
JEHN, K., RISPENS, S. and of trade unions and employee ZAROLA, A. and LEATHER, P.
THATCHER, S. (2010) The effects of companions in workplace discipline. (2006) Violence and aggression
conflict asymmetry on work group Industrial Relations Journal. Vol 42, management training for trainers
and individual outcomes. Academy No 2, March. pp195–211. and managers: a national
of Management Journal. Vol 53, evaluation of the training provision
No 3, June. pp596–616. SAUNDRY, R. and WIBBERLEY, in healthcare settings [online].
G. (2012) Mediation and early Research Report, No RR440.
LATREILLE, P. (2011) Mediation: a resolution: a case study in conflict London: Health and Safety
thematic review of the Acas/CIPD management [online]. Research Executive. Available at: http://www.
evidence [online]. Research Paper, Paper, No 12/12. London: Acas. hse.gov.uk/research/rrpdf/rr440.
No 13/11. London: Acas. Available Available at: http://www.acas.org. pdf [Accessed 9 March 2015].
at: http://www.acas.org.uk/media/ uk/media/pdf/5/c/Mediation-and-
pdf/h/m/1311_Thematic_review_of_ Early-Resolution-A-Case-Study-in-
workplace_mediation-accessible- Conflict-Management-accessible-
version-Apr-2012.pdf [Accessed version.pdf [Accessed 9 March 2015].
9 March 2015].
SAUNDRY, R., BENNETT, T. and
LENCIONI P. (2002) The five WIBBERLEY, G. (2013) Workplace
dysfunctions of a team: a leadership mediation: the participant experience
fable. London: Wiley. [online]. Research Paper, No
02/13. London: Acas. Available at:
LINES, D. and HAMILL, P. (2008) http://www.acas.org.uk/media/
Thriving in a diverse business world. pdf/t/j/Workplace-mediation-
London: KPMG. the-participant-experience.pdf
[Accessed 9 March 2015].

31   Getting under the skin of workplace conflict: Tracing the experiences of employees
Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development
151 The Broadway London SW19 1JQ United Kingdom
T +44 (0)20 8612 6200 F +44 (0)20 8612 6201
E [email protected] W cipd.co.uk
Incorporated by Royal Charter
Registered as a charity in England and Wales (1079797) and Scotland (SC045154)
Issued: April 2015 Reference: 6910 © CIPD 2015