Business and Technology · Sources of conflict and techniques for conflict resolution

Conflict Resolution Techniques and the Thomas-Kilmann Model

Updated 11 October 2026 · Fact-checked

The Thomas-Kilmann model shows five ways to handle conflict, based on how assertive and how cooperative you are: competing, collaborating, compromising, avoiding and accommodating. To answer an exam question, spot the situation, then pick the mode that fits the urgency, importance and relationship at stake.

Understand Conflict Resolution Techniques and Thomas-Kilmann Model

Conflict happens when people or groups have goals, values or interests that clash. It is not always bad. The skill is choosing how to respond.

The Thomas-Kilmann model says every response to conflict sits on two scales. Assertiveness is how far you try to satisfy your own concerns. Cooperativeness is how far you try to satisfy the other person's concerns. Combining the two scales gives five modes.

Competing: high assertiveness, low cooperativeness. You push for your own way. It is a win-lose approach.
Accommodating: low assertiveness, high cooperativeness. You give way to the other side.
Avoiding: low on both. You ignore the issue, delay it or withdraw.
Collaborating: high on both. You work together to find a solution that fully meets both sides' needs. It is win-win.
Compromising: medium on both. Each side gives up something and you meet in the middle.

No mode is best every time. Competing suits an emergency or an unpopular but necessary decision, such as a safety rule. Collaborating suits important issues where both views matter and there is time. Compromising suits a deadlock when time is short and a fair middle ground will do. Avoiding suits trivial issues, or when emotions need to cool down. Accommodating suits when the issue matters more to the other side, or when you are wrong, or when you want to build goodwill.

The exam often asks you to tell collaboration and compromise apart. In collaboration, both sides get what they truly need, often by finding a new option. In compromise, both sides get part of what they wanted and lose part.

Three formal third-party methods also appear. In negotiation, the parties talk directly to reach agreement. In mediation, a neutral person helps the parties reach their own agreement, but cannot impose one. In arbitration, a neutral person hears both sides and makes a decision, which is usually binding.

Key formulas to remember

Competing: High assertiveness + low cooperativeness; Win-lose. Use for emergencies, vital rules or unpopular but necessary decisions.
Collaborating: High assertiveness + high cooperativeness; Win-win. Use when the issue is important, both views matter and time allows.
Compromising: Medium assertiveness + medium cooperativeness; Partial win for each side. Use when time is short or a deadlock needs breaking.
Avoiding: Low assertiveness + low cooperativeness; Lose-lose or postponed. Use for trivial issues or to allow a cooling-off period.
Accommodating: Low assertiveness + high cooperativeness; Lose-win. Use to keep the peace, build goodwill or when the other side's issue matters more.
Third-party methods: Negotiation: parties decide. Mediation: neutral helps, parties decide. Arbitration: neutral decides.; Arbitration is usually binding. Mediation is not.

How to solve Conflict Resolution Techniques and Thomas-Kilmann Model questions

Use this method for any scenario question on handling conflict.

1Read the scenario and identify who is in conflict and what the dispute is about.
2Judge the importance of the issue. Is it vital or trivial?
3Judge the time available. Is a quick decision needed?
4Judge the relationship. Does the long-term relationship matter?
5Match to the mode: urgent and vital points to competing; important with time points to collaborating; short time and deadlock points to compromising; trivial or heated points to avoiding; the other side matters more points to accommodating.
6Check the wording for clues such as 'both sides fully satisfied' (collaborating), 'each gives up something' (compromising) or 'neutral decides' (arbitration).
7Select your answer and check no other option fits better.

Quickest way: Assertive and cooperative check

When to use it: Use for any multiple choice question that describes a behaviour and asks you to name the mode.

Ask: is the person pushing their own interests? That is assertiveness.
Ask: are they helping the other side get what it wants? That is cooperativeness.
Both high: collaborating. Both medium with give and take: compromising.
Only assertive: competing. Only cooperative: accommodating. Neither: avoiding.
For third parties: who makes the final decision? Parties means mediation or negotiation; the neutral means arbitration.

Common mistakes in Conflict Resolution Techniques and Thomas-Kilmann Model

Treating compromise and collaboration as the same thing.
Both involve working with the other side and reaching agreement.
Fix: Ask whether both sides lose something. If yes, it is compromise. If both needs are fully met, it is collaboration.
Saying competing is always bad and collaborating is always best.
Win-win sounds ideal, so students pick it by default.
Fix: Match the mode to the situation. In an emergency, collaboration takes too long and competing is right.
Confusing avoiding with accommodating.
In both cases you do not get your way.
Fix: Avoiding means you do not deal with the issue. Accommodating means you deal with it by giving the other side what it wants.
Saying a mediator makes a decision.
Mediation and arbitration sound alike.
Fix: A mediator helps the parties agree. An arbitrator decides, and the decision is usually binding.
Mixing up the two scales, for example calling avoiding 'high cooperativeness'.
Students memorise names but not the axes.
Fix: Learn the grid: assertiveness up, cooperativeness across. Place each mode on it.

Worked examples

Example 1

A project manager and the sales director disagree on a delivery date. Neither can finish the work before a client deadline in two days unless they settle it now. They agree the sales director will accept a date three days later than he wanted, and the project manager will add a weekend shift. Which Thomas-Kilmann mode is this?
A. Competing
B. Compromising
C. Avoiding
D. Accommodating

Show the solution

Check what each side did. Both gave up part of their position: a later date and extra work.
Check the time pressure. Time is short, which suits compromise.
Neither side fully got what it wanted, so it is not collaboration. It is also not one-sided, so it is not accommodating.
Neither pushed hard nor withdrew, so it is not competing or avoiding.

Answer: B. Compromising

Example 2

A neutral expert listens to a supplier and a customer in a contract dispute, reviews the evidence and issues a decision that both parties have agreed in advance to accept. Which method is this?
A. Negotiation
B. Mediation
C. Arbitration
D. Accommodating

Show the solution

Identify the third party. A neutral expert is involved, so it is not direct negotiation.
Identify who decides. The expert issues the decision, not the parties.
The parties agreed in advance to accept it, so it is binding.
Mediation would leave the decision with the parties. Accommodating is a Thomas-Kilmann mode, not a third-party method.

Answer: C. Arbitration

Exam tips

Learn the five modes by their position on the assertiveness and cooperativeness grid, so you can decode any scenario.
Questions often give a situation and ask which mode is most appropriate. Look for clues about urgency, importance and relationship.
Watch for the words 'both sides fully satisfied' (collaborating) and 'each side gives something up' (compromising).
For multiple response questions, read how many answers to select and test each option against the grid.
Do not spend long on these questions. Two minutes is enough once you know the grid.

Practice questions from Sources of conflict and techniques for conflict resolution

Conflict Resolution Techniques and Thomas-Kilmann Model: frequently asked questions

What are the five Thomas-Kilmann conflict modes?

They are competing, collaborating, compromising, avoiding and accommodating. Each reflects a different mix of assertiveness and cooperativeness. You choose the mode that fits the situation.

What is the difference between compromise and collaboration?

In compromise, each side gives up something and accepts a partial result. In collaboration, both sides work together to find a solution that fully meets their underlying needs. Collaboration usually takes more time and trust.

What is the difference between mediation and arbitration?

A mediator is a neutral person who helps the parties reach their own agreement and cannot impose one. An arbitrator hears both sides and makes a decision, which is usually binding.

When is avoiding a sensible choice?

Avoiding works when the issue is trivial, when emotions are high and need time to settle, or when you need more information. It is a poor choice for important issues that will get worse if ignored.