You may read the title of this article and think, ‘What? That can’t be right!’
I don’t blame you. In the vast majority of team workshops on this subject, I would say approximately 80-85 percent of participants tend to draw negative connotations when asked their views about the concept of conflict. But let me propose something.
Have you ever thought at the end of a team meeting, “Well, we didn’t really get to the heart of the issue”? if you have, you’re not alone. Many senior teams face this exact problem – meetings that feel productive on the surface in that the set agenda was covered, but fail to address the deeper challenges. So that item is passed over to the next team meeting or taken ‘off line’.
Often, the culprit is a lack of conflict. Not the destructive kind that pits people against one another, but the productive kind—cognitive conflict—that drives robust debate, innovative ideas, and better decisions.
In a recent episode of Glimpses of the Blindingly Obvious (GOBO) podcast, my guest and longtime friend Gary Blissett and I tackled this thorny topic. We explored why teams need more conflict—not less—and how leaders can create an environment where the right kind of conflict can flourish and actually help the teams effectiveness.
Affective conflict can produce highly emotional responses
Cognitive vs. Affective Conflict
Conflict. For many, the word sparks unease. It conjures up images of heated arguments, fractured relationships, and meetings no one wants to attend. This is affective conflict which is an emotional disagreement that arises from interpersonal tension. Affective conflict can produce highly emotional responses because at its root lies personal values, beliefs and interpretation of what is ‘really’ meant by the other person disagreeing. In terms of team discussions, we can label this as unproductive conflict. It doesn’t help anyone, reduces trust and team cohesion.
But conflict, when handled well, can be a powerful force for good in teams and extremely productive in furthering the thinking and the quality of the decision making. I would argue that the higher the decision stakes, the more cognitive conflict the team needs. Cognitive conflict that arises from different perspectives, viewpoints, ideas, opinion, robust exchanges and exploration typically leads to far better outcomes. It harnesses the collective brainpower of the team far more. It thrives on curiosity and encourages people to challenge concepts, not each other and is ultimately productive.
As a senior team leader, your role in cultivating productive conflict is pivotal
False harmony: A Silent Threat
Picture this: a senior team sits around a table discussing a strategic priority. The conversation flows smoothly. Heads nod in agreement. No one challenges the plan. On the surface, it’s a textbook example of teamwork. But beneath the calm lies a hidden risk: false harmony. I’ve worked with dozens of teams where this is their starting point. Consensus seems to abound.
But false harmony emerges when team members suppress their thoughts—out of fear, apathy, or politeness. People self-edit, don’t ask questions or challenge the overarching train of thought. It feels safe, but it stifles progress. Without robust debate, critical ideas are missed, poor decisions are made and, more importantly, genuine buy-in suffers. Decisions that emerge from false harmony often lack the deep engagement needed to drive execution. Is there any wonder that frustrations and confusion arise when the team discovers that some critical element of executing on the decision wasn’t fully delivered by one of the team. “But I thought we had agreed that . . .” you hear people say.
The consequence is that nobody gets held accountable, results are not achieved as intended and ultimately the team is not delivering strategic speed. (More about strategic speed in a previous article)
Why Leaders Must Champion Conflict
If your team meetings are always smooth and agreeable, it’s worth asking: Are we really being honest and exploring this topic fully? But fostering productive cognitive conflict requires intentionality from the team leader. You have to be its champion.
As a senior team leader, your role in cultivating productive conflict is pivotal. Teams take cues from the leader. If you model open debate, show curiosity, and welcome dissenting views, your team will follow suit. If you prioritise compliance or avoid disagreement, false harmony will start to take root.
Another insight that emerged in our discussion was the myth of 100% consensus. In reality, teams rarely agree unanimously. True consensus isn’t about everyone loving the decision. It’s about being willing to support the outcome. This kind of buy-in happens when the leader and the team handle cognitive conflict well.
Part of the driver of commitment to an agreed course of action is when individuals feel that their voice has been heard. People will buy-in to the decision even if they initially disagreed with it, as long as they had their point of view discussed and explored fully. Team members who feel their perspectives have been considered are more likely to commit, even if the final decision doesn’t align with their own views.
When teams shy away from conflict, the consequences are significant
So if you perceive your team is not always robustly exploring options on a critical decision, it’s time to focus on building a team climate of psychological safety and curiosity. As I’ve said previously elsewhere if you want this kind of climate in your team, then as the leader you go first.
The Role of Psychological Safety
By now you will have heard of Microsoft’s Aristotle project which tried to understand what makes teams successful. They found that those teams with a strong sense of psychological safety fostered an environment where members felt comfortable expressing their thoughts and ideas openly, leading to more productive discussions and innovative solutions.
It seems reasonable, therefore, to suggest that productive conflict can’t exist without trust. Team members need to feel safe expressing their views, knowing that disagreement won’t lead to ridicule or retaliation. This sense of psychological safety is foundational for deep, honest conversations. So what can you do to champion this.
To nurture psychological safety you can:
- Acknowledge and validate diverse perspectives in the room
- Discourage interruptions and conversations being dominated by one or two voices
- Be transparent about your own thinking and actively invite contrary views
When safety is present, cognitive conflict flourishes. Without it, even the most skilled team will struggle to engage fully.
Creating Space for Deeper Conversations
For many senior teams, time is a luxury. But robust discussions need time. This is where sticking to a timetabled agenda becomes problematic. Leaders must create space for these conversations, even when deadlines loom. The benefits, which include richer ideas, stronger buy-in, and fewer backtracks, far outweigh the short-term costs.
To lead conflict-driven conversations you can set the tone early; reframing conflict as an intentional tool for better outcomes, rather than a sign of team dysfunction. Posing questions like, “What’s the strongest counterargument to this idea?” help to promote exploration of different perspectives, and a classic coaching approach is to embrace silences. Remember, some team members need time to process before being able to contribute.
The Risks of Avoiding Conflict
When teams shy away from conflict, the consequences are significant: Key insights and ideas stay buried, without diverse perspectives, choices lack depth and, over time, team members disengage, believing their input doesn’t matter.
Conversely, embracing cognitive conflict leads to better problem-solving and stronger team dynamics. In our podcast, Gary shared a story of an IT leadership team that struggled with engagement. Some members felt disconnected from the team’s decisions because the topics under discussion didn’t impact their roles. As a result, they disengaged entirely.
The breakthrough came when the team confronted the root issue: the wrong people were at the table. This realisation led to a restructuring of the team, ensuring everyone present had a stake in the discussions. It’s a powerful reminder that productive conflict isn’t just about what’s said—it’s about who’s saying it and why.
Conflict isn’t a dirty word. It’s a necessary ingredient for high-performing teams. But the key lies in the type of conflict and how it’s managed. As a senior leader, your ability to foster cognitive conflict can transform your team’s decision-making, engagement, and results. So, the next time your team faces a tough conversation, lean into the discomfort. Encourage curiosity. Challenge ideas. And remind your team that the goal isn’t to win an argument—it’s to uncover the best possible outcome. After all, conflict done right isn’t a problem – it’s a solution.
You can still listen to this episode of the GOBO show ‘Teams need More Conflict. Here’s Why’
