Key Concepts
Conflict on a project is normal and often productive. The skill is telling healthy debate from damaging argument, then stepping in before arguments turn personal or hurt the team. Tools like the Five Levels of Conflict model help you diagnose how serious a conflict really is.
Introduction
Whenever we bring people together to solve problems and build products or services, we will encounter differences of opinion and conflict. Some forms of debate and arguing are productive, as debating options and the best way forward can lead to better decisions and more robust solutions.
However, when arguments escalate beyond the facts at hand to become personal or impact team performance, they need to be addressed. A critical skill project managers need to develop is diagnosing the difference between the healthy debate of options or ideas and damaging arguing.
Healthy conflict is necessary for building commitment to decisions since it allows for the robust testing of ideas, which leads to a stronger commitment to the final group decision. This is why many high-performing teams seem to be continuously engaged in good-natured argument as they try to understand all the options, test ideas for flaws, and build consensus. These types of conflict are productive and desirable.
1.2.1 Identify Conflict Sources
One tool for diagnosing the severity of conflict is the “Five Levels of Conflict” model developed by Speed Leas, which shows a progression from a simple problem to solve all the way to people or groups declaring war on one another.
Listening to the language and phrases the team uses and comparing them to descriptions of the five levels can help determine the stage of a conflict:
- Level 1 (Problem to Solve) – The language is friendly and mostly constructive, where people back up statements with facts. E.G. “Oh, I see what you are saying now. I still prefer the other approach, but I understand your suggestion.”
- Level 2 (Disagreement) – People start to include self-protection. E.G. “I know you think my idea won’t work, but we tried your suggestion last time, and there were a lot of problems.”
- Level 3 (Contest) – The language becomes distorted with over-generalizations and magnified positions. E.G. “If only he wasn’t on the team…”, “She always takes over the demo.”
- Level 4 (Crusade) – The conflict becomes more ideological and divided. E.G. “They’re just plain stupid” and “It’s not worth talking to them.”
- Level 5 (World War) – The language is altogether combative, or the opposing people do not speak directly to each other, only talking to those “on their side” and saying things such as, “It is us or them” and “We’ve got to beat them!”
While conflict can escalate to toxic levels, it is crucial to understand why it can also be constructive. Teams need to feel safe debating ideas and disagreeing with suggestions in order to build commitment for outcomes, and without passionate debate, which includes good-natured conflict, team members rarely buy-in and commit to decisions.
1.2.2 Analyze the context for the conflict
Analyzing the context and the words used in arguments is an excellent way to understand the level of conflict. Healthy arguments are focused on the data, the facts, and ideas under discussion, while unhealthy arguments often make things personal or use generalizations to dismiss inputs from the other party. When we hear these unhealthy arguments, it is time to try and deescalate the conflict, and the strategy for doing this depends on how severe it has become.
Based on the 5 levels concept, the following de-escalation responses are suggested based on conflict level:
- Level 1 (Problem to Solve) – Facilitate collaborative problem solving
- Level 2 (Disagreement) – Active listening and exploring interests
- Level 3 (Contest) – Negotiate and get to the facts, trying to take it from personal to factual
- Level 4 (Crusade) – Bring in a mediator or arbitrator
- Level 5 (World War) – Separate the parties and consider organizational intervention
1.2.3 Implement an Agreed-On Resolution Strategy
When it comes to resolving conflict, a practical model is the Dual-Concern Grid by Langton and Sadri, which describes conflict resolution options plotted on an axis that shows Concern for Others (X-axis) and Concern for Ourself (Y-axis).
There are several ways we can try to resolve conflict. We could use positional power and tell people to stop arguing (Force/Direct), but this is temporary and futile since it does not solve the problem. Alternatively, we could accommodate people by smoothing the problem and do the work ourselves (Smooth/Accommodate), but neither of these approaches is ideal.
Instead, we should try to be in the upper right quadrant of high concern for others and high concern for oneself, which is the collaborative area of conflict resolution where we confront the issue and hopefully solve it. This all sounds good in theory, but dealing with people when they are angry or upset is never straightforward.
Three Steps for Managing Conflict
A good approach to try is the Three Steps for Managing Conflict using a Confronting/Problem Solving Approach that combines several conflict resolution models:
Step 1: Define the Problem – This involves acknowledging the conflict, establishing common ground or goals such as ‘we both want what is best for the customer’ and separating the problem from the people.
Step 2: Explore and Evaluate Alternatives – This is a “diverge,” brainstorming phase where many different alternatives are investigated and assessed.
Step 3: Select Best Alternative – This is the “converge” step where we decide on the best way forward.
These tools are, at best, direction arrows on a tricky journey that can help us navigate to a solution, but they do not replace the hard work of actively listening to both sides of the conflict and empathizing with different viewpoints. That takes an investment of patience and empathy, as does the following steps of encouraging people to let go of personal attachment to ideas or feelings.
Conflicts are inescapable, and at best, they are signs of a vibrant, robust team that is happy to test and improve their ideas and choices. However, if arguments become more personal, they also develop a harmful and counterproductive impact where team members disengage and distance to protect themselves. Then ideas are not well tested, and blind-spots and problems occur.
The key is to care, to get engaged, listen and try to diagnose the conflicts occurring. Maybe do a reality test by following up individually afterward and ask, “You and Preeta seemed to be having a heated debate about the design. Did you come to an agreement you are OK with?” Knowing when to let it go and when to step in is half the battle, and using these tools can help and provide some guidance for conflict resolution.
1.2.4 Communicate conflict management principles with the team and external stakeholders
What are Ground Rules?
Ground rules are clear agreements on how team members will treat each other and behave as part of the team, and they help guide the behavior of team members to a level that the group finds acceptable. Ground rules can cover anything from how team meetings will be run to how the team will handle conflict and decision-making.
Why Have Them?
Without team ground rules, current behavior and habits become the de-facto ground rules of what is acceptable, which can be a problem if these habits are not aligned to project or organizational success or are disrespectful.
Creating team norms and ground rules set some base behavior and communication expectations, which decreases the risk of confusion because people know what is expected and do not have to second-guess how to act. This can lead to improved performance through clear expectations and fewer misunderstandings.
How Do We Create Them?
Ground rules should be created collectively when the project starts, with the project manager or an interested team member leading the team in brainstorming what ground-rules they wish to establish. One technique for sparking ideas is to ask team members to think about the best teams they have ever worked on—what made it special, why did it work so well, and let’s try and recreate that magic here.
If getting started is difficult or not enough suggestions are forthcoming, consider referring to lists of common team ground rules. Once ideas have been suggested, the team must negotiate which items there is a strong consensus for, and if some people are in favor but others are not, hold it as a candidate for now. A small list with a universal agreement is more powerful than a list that contains concepts some members are not in full support of.
The ground rules should be displayed in prominent places such as team rooms and project websites so that we are frequently reminded of them and can easily refer to them if we have to remind someone else about them.
Also, consider how the team will interact with stakeholders outside of the project team—when will we communicate, how will we collaborate, who will escalate issues. Teams often have dependencies with other projects and groups, so managing these expectations and having appropriate communication protocols, shared calendars etc., is critical for success. The team charter should address both internal and external communication standards.
Ground rules should be continually evaluated and updated as needed throughout the project, and if you have inherited a team that does not have ground rules (or you forgot to define them when starting your project), it is never too late to start. Conducting a short workshop to collectively define team norms and ground rules is a great way to realign a project.
When first creating ground rules with a team, resist the temptation to get bogged down creating detailed or complex ground rules, and remind people that they will be reviewed and updated in the future as needed. Often “less-is-more” for simplicity and ease of recall.
Team Charters
In addition to posting in a high visibility location, team norms and ground rules are often documented in a Team Charter, which captures and shares the values, agreements and practices the team defined that describe how they intend to work together.
Some typical sections and the types of topics addressed in a team charter include:
- Shared values – E.G., Respect everyone’s opinion, listen to all perspectives, speak up when we violate our agreements
- Shared norms – No cellphone use during client demos and meetings, core overlap hours 10:00 am – 3:00 pm
- How and when we meet – Daily standups will be at 9:30 am in the team room
- Communication forms – Use Slack and Teams for shared questions and announcements
- How we make decisions – All decisions that impact the team will be made collectively using Fist of Five majority voting
- How we handle conflict – Reference conflict resolution approaches
- How we inspect, adapt and improve – Review team ground rules at minimum every quarter
- How we will handle feedback – We value constructive feedback and will avoid being defensive
- How we will celebrate – We will recognize and celebrate individual and team accomplishments
1.2.5 Establish an environment that fosters adherence to common ground rules.
Model the Desired Behavior
How we behave as the project manager or team lead plays a vital role in setting (or eroding) adherence to the ground rules. We may not be aware, but as Scrum Master/project manager/team lead we are watched by the team, and what we do (and do not do) is noticed and used (maybe subconsciously) to validate other team members’ decisions and actions.
If we encourage the team to define ground rules and then break or bend them, nobody else will respect them either, so we have to be sure we honor them and refer back to them when necessary.
PMI has a Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct which we also need to understand and follow. All PMI members and non-members applying for a PMI certification, such as the PMP, must agree to comply with the code of conduct. PMI also has an Ethics in Project Management Toolkit that contains helpful resources such as a project manager self-assessment and team self-assessment.
Remind People of the Ground Rules
Refer back to the ground rules to remind people of their existence and relevance, which can be in the form of a potential violation, such as “I was going to book the new workshop series, but remembered we agreed to discuss timings as a group” or as a confirmation of a ground rule, “As per our ground rules, I posted the demo schedule to the team site.”
Obviously, you would not refer back to the ground rules all the time like this, but it could be a helpful, gentle reminder if the team members seem to forget or ignore them.
Team Ground Rules and Psychological Safety
Collectively creating ground rules helps the team establish some basic psychological safety. Since they are jointly defined, they help people feel like they belong to a common team which is part of Inclusion Safety.
The subsequent steps of Learner Safety (feeling safe to ask questions), Contributor Safety (feeling safe to share your work and receive feedback), and Challenger Safety (safety to question the status quo) all build on having ground rules. Spending a couple of hours defining team norms will not instantly create psychological safety, but it is a helpful first step.
1.2.6 Manage and Rectify Ground Rule Violations
It would be wasteful and hypocritical to go to the trouble of creating team ground rules only to ignore them when we see them being violated, so when we witness a breach, we should call it out. There is probably no need to get pedantic or overly harsh since most ground-rule violations tend to be in the spur of the moment, such as during a heated discussion, talking over a quieter team member and not allowing them to contribute.
So, diplomatically, model the desired behavior and call out the violation. For example, “Joe, I noticed you were angry at Vikas when he reported the nozzle test failed. Remember, we agreed it is okay to be the messenger with bad news and you can expect a problem-solving response as one of our ground rules. I understand you were frustrated, but we should not take it out on the messenger.”
Encourage Team Enforcement
Ideally, the team should police itself against the ground rules it jointly created, which might take some practice to establish, but having the project manager as the sole enforcer is ineffective. When violations occur or when the ground rules are being discussed, ensure the team ownership is emphasized, so refer to them as our ground rules or the team ground rules, not the organization’s or even the project’s which might be more associated with only the project manager.
Handling Serious Offenders
Nobody likes having to remove team members, but sometimes it is the best thing for the team. Repeat offenders, bullies and discrimination are reasons why team members may need to be removed if coaching and then HR intervention do not work.
Underperformance might also be an issue, but people should be allowed to learn and improve, and only then, if the effort is not there, should HR be consulted and options for reassignment or removal be considered.
Dealing with underperforming and problematic team members is one of the most challenging and draining activities project managers contend with, and the combination of team ground rules, the code of ethics, and knowledge and support from HR will help somewhat.
Deliverables and Tools
- Team Charter
- Team Ground Rules
- Five Levels of Conflict (Speed Leas)
- Dual-Concern Grid (Langton and Sadri)
- Three Steps for Managing Conflict
- PMI Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct
Related Topics
FAQ
Is all project conflict bad?
No. Debating options tests ideas and builds commitment; conflict only becomes a problem when it turns personal or harms performance.
What is the Five Levels of Conflict model?
A diagnostic scale from Speed Leas, running from Problem to Solve up to World War, based on the language people use.
Why do high-performing teams argue?
Good-natured argument is how teams test ideas, find flaws, and build consensus, which leads to stronger commitment.
When should a project manager step in?
When the language and behavior move past healthy debate into self-protection, distortion, or personal attacks.
How does this task fit into the 2026 PMP exam?
Task 1.2 sits in the People domain of the 2026 Exam Content Outline. The 2026 PMP Exam page has the domain and task breakdown and what changed in the new exam.
Mastery Map & Quiz
Congratulations! You earned the Manage Conflicts badge.