Workplace conflict is often attributed to personalities, priorities, or performance. More often than not though, conflict emerges from something less visible: how people interpret each other’s actions through the lens of their own experiences, stress levels, and assumptions.

When stakes are high and emotions are strong, people don’t just exchange information; they fill in mental and emotional gaps. Those gaps can be shaped by past experiences, cultural norms, power dynamics, and unconscious shortcuts the brain uses to make sense of ambiguity. In other words, conflict is rarely just about what was said. It’s about what was assumed.

This is why two people can walk away from the same meeting with completely different understandings and why unresolved tension tends to resurface in more damaging ways later. Getting down to the unspoken roots of conflict, whether they are biases or intentions, can help solve the conflict while also allowing that conflict to lead to progress.

When Conversations Carry Risk — and Opportunity

Certain conversations matter more than others. They’re the ones people rehearse, postpone, or even avoid because something important feels at stake. These moments typically involve differing perspectives, emotional investment, and real consequences for relationships or outcomes.

Handled poorly, these conversations reinforce silos, mistrust, and inequity, especially when some voices are dismissed as “too emotional,” “too quiet,” or “too difficult.” Handled well, they become opportunities to surface perspectives that are often overlooked.

The authors of Crucial Conversations: Tools for Talking When Stakes Are High describe these moments of conflict as inflection points — where the quality of dialogue directly shapes results and relationships.

When conflict arises, what separates productive conversations from damaging ones is not agreement. It’s intent.

Difference, Stress, and the Stories We Tell Ourselves

Conflict often begins at the intersection of difference and pressure. People bring different communication styles, ways of processing information, expectations about authority, and thresholds for uncertainty into the workplace. None of these are inherently problematic until stress, burnout, or rapid change enters the picture.

Under pressure, the brain looks for efficiency. It fills in missing information with stories that feel true, even when they aren’t fully grounded in fact. Research shows that stress narrows attention and reduces cognitive flexibility, making people more reactive and less open to alternative perspectives.

That’s where bias quietly enters conflict. Biases are rapid, typically unconscious, judgements your brain makes based on previous experiences or cultural exposures. Even though they may not materialize as overt judgment, they can inform assumptions about intent, competence, or commitment and apply them unevenly depending on who is speaking, how they speak, or where they sit in the organization.

Common outcomes of bias include:

• Interpreting direct communication as aggression instead of precision
• Viewing hesitation as disengagement instead of reflection
• Assuming missed deadlines reflect motivation rather than workload or clarity

When these assumptions go unexamined, they harden into conclusions, and conversations become about defending positions rather than understanding realities.

Shifting From Being Right to Getting It Right

Unproductive conflict is often driven by hidden goals: to win, to prove a point, to protect status, or to avoid discomfort. These goals narrow the conversation and shut down learning, particularly from people whose perspectives differ from the dominant norm.

More effective conversations are grounded in healthier intentions:

• Learning what’s actually happening
• Testing assumptions rather than defending them
• Reaching outcomes that work for more than one perspective
• Preserving trust, even amid disagreement

Psychological safety plays a crucial role here. Harvard Business School professor Amy Edmondson’s research shows that environments where people feel safe to speak up — without fear of embarrassment or retaliation — are more likely to surface problems early and innovate effectively.

Safety doesn’t mean comfort. It means clarity about intent, respect for difference, and accountability for impact.

Emotional Intelligence as a Counterweight to Assumptions

Emotional intelligence (EI) is one of the most effective tools for interrupting assumptions. At its core, EI creates space between stimulus and response—a pause long enough to question the story forming in your mind.

Self-awareness is especially critical to override assumptions. Emotional triggers (e.g.: specific words, behaviors, or situations that cause a disproportionate, automatic response) often activate faster than conscious thought. Without awareness, people respond to the trigger rather than the situation in front of them.

In moments of conflict, EI helps leaders and colleagues ask better internal questions:

• What am I reacting to right now?
• What assumptions am I making?
• What else might explain this behavior?

While those questions don’t eliminate disagreement, they can dramatically reduce escalation.

From Insight to Action

Awareness is a critical first step, although it doesn’t automatically change behavior, especially in moments of pressure. To truly shift how conflict and bias show up in everyday conversations, organizations need shared practices that make thoughtful dialogue the default, not the exception. The following tips help translate intention into action without requiring formal authority or sweeping culture change.

• Build pause points into conversations
  High-stakes discussions move quickly, which leave little room to challenge assumptions. Teams can normalize short pause practices, such as summarizing what was just heard before responding or asking one clarifying question before offering an opinion. These moments slow reactivity and create space for more accurate understanding.

• Separate facts from interpretations—out loud.
  Encourage people to name observable facts first, then clearly distinguish their interpretations. For example: “The report was submitted two days late. I’m interpreting that as a capacity issue—can you help me understand what happened?” This practice reduces defensiveness and makes assumptions visible rather than implied.

• Name intent at the start of difficult conversations.
  Misunderstood intent fuels unnecessary conflict. Opening with statements like “My goal here is to understand what’s getting in the way” or “I want us to find a solution that works for both teams” signals safety and helps others stay engaged rather than guarded.

• Create explicit norms for how disagreement happens.
  Psychological safety grows when expectations are clear. Teams benefit from agreeing on norms such as: questioning ideas without questioning motives, inviting quieter voices into the discussion, and treating emotional responses as data rather than disruptions. These norms are most effective when revisited regularly, not just written down once. 

• Practice assumption-checking in low-stakes moments.
  The skills needed in crucial conversations are best built before tension runs high. Leaders and teams can regularly ask reflective questions like “What might we be missing?” or “How else could this be interpreted?” during routine meetings. Over time, this strengthens cognitive flexibility when it matters most. 

• Model repair, not perfection.
  Even with the best tools, people will misstep. What builds trust is how those moments are handled. A simple acknowledgment—“I realize I made an assumption earlier; I want to revisit that”—can restore safety quickly and demonstrate accountability without assigning blame.

Rather than eliminate conflict, these practices create conditions where differences are explored with curiosity rather than judgment and conversations move toward shared understanding instead of entrenched positions. When used consistently, moments of tension become opportunities for clarity, learning, and stronger working relationships.

Turning Tension Into Progress

Conflict isn’t a sign that something has gone wrong. Often, it’s a signal that important perspectives are colliding and that there’s something meaningful at stake.

When people slow down, separate facts from interpretation, and stay curious about viewpoints that differ from their own, conflict becomes a mechanism for better decisions rather than fractured relationships. The real work isn’t eliminating tension; it’s learning how to engage it thoughtfully.

In the end, most conflict isn’t about the topic on the table—it’s about whether people feel seen, heard, and understood in the conversation around it.

Where have you seen assumptions impact conflict in your organization? What are some tips you would recommend that would make you feel psychologically safe at work?

Leave a comment below, send us an email, or follow us on LinkedIn.