Understand how you respond when goals, needs or perspectives clash.
Conflict style describes the strategies a person tends to use during disagreement. The dual-concern model organizes these strategies around two broad dimensions: concern for one’s own goals and concern for the other person’s goals or the relationship. This original CounselorAid assessment reviews five patterns—avoiding, accommodating, competing, compromising and collaborating—without reproducing the Thomas–Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument or another proprietary measure.
- Assessment type: Original research-informed coaching assessment
- Items: 25
- Time: 8–10 minutes
- Recall period: Typical conflicts over the past six months
- Evidence status: Informed by dual-concern and conflict-management research; not psychometrically validated
Five conflict approaches
| Style | Primary approach | Can be useful when |
|---|---|---|
| Avoiding | Delay, withdraw or do not engage | The issue is minor, emotions are too high, or safety is uncertain |
| Accommodating | Prioritise the other person’s preference | The issue matters more to them or preserving goodwill is more important |
| Competing | Push firmly for your preferred outcome | Urgent action, safety, ethics or a non-negotiable boundary is involved |
| Compromising | Each side gives up part of what it wants | Time is limited and a workable middle ground is sufficient |
| Collaborating | Explore needs and create an integrative solution | The issue is important, trust permits openness and time is available |
No single style is best in every situation. Effective conflict management involves selecting a response that fits importance, urgency, power, safety and relationship goals.
How to respond
| Response | Score |
|---|---|
| Almost never | 1 |
| Rarely | 2 |
| Sometimes | 3 |
| Often | 4 |
| Almost always | 5 |
Assessment questions
A. Avoiding
- I postpone difficult conversations until emotions or circumstances are more manageable.
- I withdraw when a disagreement appears unlikely to produce a useful result.
- I let minor issues pass rather than investing energy in them.
- I avoid conflict because I expect it to become uncomfortable or damaging.
- I wait for a problem to resolve itself instead of addressing it directly.
Avoiding score: ______ / 25
B. Accommodating
- I give up my preference to preserve the relationship.
- I accept another person’s solution when the issue matters more to them.
- I prioritise harmony even when my own concerns remain unresolved.
- I take responsibility quickly to help a conflict settle.
- I adapt to the other person’s needs rather than asking them to adapt to mine.
Accommodating score: ______ / 25
C. Competing
- I argue strongly for the outcome I believe is correct.
- I act decisively when a conflict requires a quick decision.
- I protect important boundaries even when another person dislikes the decision.
- I use evidence, authority or persistence to influence the outcome.
- I am willing to risk temporary tension to address a serious problem.
Competing score: ______ / 25
D. Compromising
- I look for a middle position both people can accept.
- I am willing to give up part of what I want if the other person does the same.
- I prefer a workable agreement to a prolonged search for the ideal solution.
- I suggest dividing resources, time or responsibilities to settle disagreement.
- I focus on a fair exchange when interests cannot be fully combined.
Compromising score: ______ / 25
E. Collaborating
- I explore the needs beneath each person’s stated position.
- I ask questions before deciding what solution would be fair.
- I look for options that protect important interests on both sides.
- I can discuss disagreement openly without treating the other person as an enemy.
- I invest time in a durable solution when the issue and relationship are important.
Collaborating score: ______ / 25
Scoring and interpretation
| Style score | Reflection range |
|---|---|
| 5–10 | Less frequently used |
| 11–15 | Occasionally used |
| 16–20 | Frequently used |
| 21–25 | Strong current preference |
Your highest score suggests a preferred strategy, not a permanent identity. The spread of scores matters: similar scores may indicate flexibility, while one dominant score may indicate a habitual response.
Strengths and risks of each style
| Style | Potential strength | Potential overuse risk |
|---|---|---|
| Avoiding | Prevents escalation and saves energy | Problems accumulate or others experience silence as withdrawal |
| Accommodating | Shows generosity and protects goodwill | Needs and boundaries disappear, creating resentment |
| Competing | Supports decisive action and protection | Others feel controlled, dismissed or unsafe |
| Compromising | Produces efficient, workable settlements | Important needs may be traded away too quickly |
| Collaborating | Creates understanding and durable solutions | Consumes too much time or assumes trust that is not present |
Choose the style that fits the situation
- Importance: How much does the outcome matter?
- Urgency: Is there time to explore options?
- Relationship: Is preserving trust a major goal?
- Power: Can both people speak and negotiate freely?
- Safety: Could direct engagement increase risk?
- Reversibility: Can the decision be changed later?
Conflict flexibility practice
- Name your automatic style.
- Identify what that style is trying to protect.
- Consider one alternative style.
- Choose a clear opening sentence.
- Set a pause point if the discussion becomes unsafe or unproductive.
Example collaborative opening: “I think we are protecting different needs. Could we identify what matters most to each of us before choosing a solution?”
Related CounselorAid resources
- Use the Communication Style Assessment to examine how conflict messages are expressed.
- Learn structured assertiveness with DEAR MAN.
- Use the GIVE Skill to maintain the relationship.
- Use the FAST Skill to protect self-respect.
- Explore Boundary Building for non-negotiable limits.
- Review Interpersonal Effectiveness Skills for a broader framework.
Safety and power differences
Collaboration requires enough safety, honesty and bargaining power for both people to participate. In abusive, coercive or dangerous situations, avoiding, leaving, documenting, seeking support or setting a firm limit may be more appropriate than open negotiation. Do not use conflict-style language to pressure someone to engage with an unsafe person.
Frequently asked questions
Is collaboration always the best style?
No. It is useful for important, complex issues when time and trust permit it. It may be inefficient or unsafe in other situations.
Is avoiding conflict unhealthy?
Not necessarily. Strategic delay or disengagement can prevent escalation. Chronic avoidance becomes a concern when important issues repeatedly remain unresolved.
Can conflict style change?
Yes. People can learn to use a wider range of responses through emotional regulation, assertiveness and structured problem-solving.
Research foundation
- Rahim MA. A measure of styles of handling interpersonal conflict. Academy of Management Journal. 1983.
- De Dreu CKW, Evers A, Beersma B, Kluwer ES, Nauta A. A theory-based measure of conflict management strategies in the workplace. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 2001.
- Thomas KW, Kilmann RH. Thomas–Kilmann conflict mode framework. This page does not reproduce the proprietary instrument.
Important: This original CounselorAid assessment is not the Thomas–Kilmann instrument and does not provide standardized or diagnostic scores.