What is the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Model?

The Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Model is a well-known framework for understanding how people approach and manage conflict in both personal and professional settings. It was developed by Kenneth W. Thomas and Ralph H. Kilmann in the 1970s and is used worldwide in areas such as management, education, and health care. The model outlines five main conflict-handling modes, each reflecting different levels of assertiveness and cooperativeness. By studying these modes, people can identify their own tendencies in conflict situations and learn which styles may work better for certain circumstances.

Conflict is a natural part of human interaction. When two or more individuals have differing views, needs, or goals, disagreement can occur. The Thomas-Kilmann model does not view conflict as inherently negative; it simply describes various ways individuals might respond and interact during these moments.

The Two Dimensions of the Model

The model is built on two main dimensions:

• Assertiveness – This refers to how concerned a person is with satisfying their own needs, goals, or interests. High assertiveness means actively pushing for one’s own viewpoint, whilst low assertiveness indicates a preference for stepping back or yielding.
• Cooperativeness – This focuses on how concerned a person is with satisfying the needs or goals of others. High cooperativeness means prioritising the other person’s interests, whilst low cooperativeness means less concern for the other side’s needs.

By combining these two dimensions into a grid, the model identifies five conflict-handling modes. Each mode represents a different balance between assertiveness and cooperativeness.

The Five Conflict Modes

Competing

Competing involves high assertiveness and low cooperativeness. This mode means focusing entirely on one’s own needs and not giving much attention to the other person’s viewpoint. People who use competing are often decisive, willing to stand firm, and inclined to use position, power, or persuasion to win their case.

Competing can be effective when quick decisions are needed or when protecting important principles. It can, however, cause tension and resentment if used inappropriately.

Collaborating

Collaborating reflects high assertiveness and high cooperativeness. It means both parties are committed to finding a solution that fully satisfies each side. This mode is about sharing ideas openly, listening actively, and working together creatively.

Collaborating is suitable when the relationship between the parties is valued and the problem is complex enough to require input from everyone involved. It can be time-consuming, but it often leads to long-lasting agreements.

Compromising

Compromising shows moderate assertiveness and moderate cooperativeness. It involves finding a middle ground, where each party gives up part of what they want to reach an acceptable agreement. This mode can be practical when time is limited and the stakes are not overly high.

Compromising may not fully satisfy either side, but it can prevent disputes from escalating and allow progress to continue.

Avoiding

Avoiding is low assertiveness and low cooperativeness. It means stepping away from the conflict and not dealing with the matter directly. Avoidance can work when the issue is trivial, when emotions are too heated, or when more information is needed before making a decision.

Overuse of avoidance can lead to problems being ignored and unresolved matters building up over time.

Accommodating

Accommodating reflects low assertiveness and high cooperativeness. This means prioritising the other person’s needs while downplaying one’s own concerns. People who accommodate often wish to preserve harmony or maintain relationships.

Accommodating can be useful when the other side’s needs matter more or when flexibility can strengthen trust. However, it can cause frustration if one’s own needs are constantly overlooked.

Practical Uses of the Model

The Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Model is often used for self-awareness and training purposes. Individuals complete a questionnaire to assess which modes they naturally prefer. Knowing your most common responses helps in identifying situations where a different approach might yield better results.

Workshops and coaching sessions apply the model to real scenarios so participants can practise using alternative modes. This can prepare people to manage disputes more constructively and adapt their style to suit the situation.

Conflict-handling is not a one-size-fits-all process. Each mode has strengths and weaknesses. By recognising these, people can decide which style matches the circumstances.

Benefits of Learning the Model

Understanding the five modes allows people to:

• Identify personal habits in conflict situations
• Choose a conflict style that fits the situation
• Appreciate the other person’s approach
• Reduce misunderstandings
• Find solutions more efficiently
• Reduce stress caused by conflict

The model works well in settings where teamwork and communication are important. It encourages flexibility by showing that different challenges may need different responses.

Challenges in Applying the Model

The model is simple in concept, but applying it effectively takes practice. People may:

• Resist changing their preferred style
• Misjudge which mode fits a situation
• Struggle to balance assertiveness with cooperativeness

Real conflicts are often emotionally charged, which can make rational decisions harder to achieve. The model’s value lies in its clarity, but success depends on the willingness to adapt and work constructively.

Choosing the Right Mode

When deciding which mode to use, it can help to think about:

• The level of urgency
• The value of the relationship
• How serious the stakes are
• The amount of information available
• The potential consequences of each approach

Sometimes it is worth switching from one mode to another as circumstances change. For example, avoiding might be sensible early in a heated dispute, but collaborating could follow once emotions settle.

Learning Through Practice

In training settings, participants often role-play different conflict modes. This gives them first-hand experience of how the approaches feel and how they affect others. Practice can reveal that some modes work better in certain contexts than expected.

Reflection exercises after real conflicts can help identify whether the chosen approach was effective, and whether another mode could have led to a better outcome.

Adaptability in Conflict

The model encourages people to be adaptable rather than fixed in one style. An adaptable person can switch from competing to compromising or from avoiding to collaborating, depending on changes in the situation.

Approaching conflict with an adaptable mindset allows room for creativity, empathy, and better problem-solving.

Linking Conflict Modes to Communication

Effective conflict handling depends on strong communication skills. Each mode benefits from specific communication techniques:

• Competing: clear, confident language without aggression
• Collaborating: open questioning, active listening, and summarising
• Compromising: polite negotiation and clarification of terms
• Avoiding: careful withdrawal, signalling willingness to address later
• Accommodating: showing empathy and offering support

Using these techniques alongside the chosen mode increases the chance of reaching a positive outcome.

Final Thoughts

The Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Model offers a practical way to understand different approaches to conflict. Instead of labelling one style as “best,” it explains that each mode has its own strengths and drawbacks. Its value lies in helping people become aware of their own tendencies and giving them tools to respond in ways that suit the situation.

By examining assertiveness and cooperativeness together, the model shows that conflict-handling styles can range widely from competitive to collaborative, from withdrawing to yielding. It encourages adaptability, communication, and thoughtfulness. Through practice and reflection, people can learn to respond with greater purpose, creating better results in both personal and professional relationships.