Transforming Tension in Meetings Instead of Managing It: A Conflict Resolution Perspective

Meetings, indispensable elements of organizational life, are one of the primary ways teams come together to share, align, and move forward. Although the Turkish Language Association (TDK) defines a meeting narrowly as “the gathering of more than one person for specific purposes; assembly, session,” in practice, we tend to think of meetings in broader terms: as spaces where processes are evaluated, ideas are shared, and decisions are made. In other words, gatherings where “communication” plays a leading role.

It is therefore quite natural that when we bring together the words “meetings,” “tension,” and “management,” concepts such as corporate communication skills and leadership development immediately come to mind. These approaches often offer effective methods for quickly “suppressing” existing tensions and conflicts. Their main focus is on “how to manage tension.” This focus is not wrong, but it is incomplete. To complete it, we might begin by asking: “How can we read, understand, and transform the causes of tension?” The conflict resolution perspective builds its focus on these very questions, seeking deeper and more sustainable answers.

At Conflictus, we often find ourselves searching for answers to precisely these kinds of situations and challenges. These explorations lead us to the training and consultancy programs we design and implement for teams who spend a significant part of their professional lives in meetings. 

We are pleased to observe that the methods and tools we develop in these processes find real resonance in practice; for us, they are both instructive and transformative.

In this article, we wanted to share what we really mean when we talk about “addressing tensions in meetings through the lens of conflict resolution” and how this approach can bring depth to organizational communication and decision-making processes.

***

Starting with Understanding:

Tension or Conflict?

First, it is important to examine the relationship between tension and conflict. Understanding the underlying conflict patterns behind tensions and recognizing when they might escalate into conflict are essential for managing such processes effectively. Because the relationship between tension and conflict reveals not only what is going wrong, but also what has the potential to change.

When this relationship is properly understood, studying the definition, dynamics, and interaction of conflict with tension provides a sound foundation. Viewing tensions and conflicts not as things to be suppressed but as natural “information signals” within the system becomes an essential standpoint for examining meeting management processes from a conflict resolution perspective.

Conflict Sensitivity

Conflict sensitivity is not about avoiding conflict; it is the ability to anticipate how a word, tone, or decision might affect others.

As we often emphasize, instead of intervening only once conflicts arise, it is important to understand potential sources of conflict in advance and develop “preventive” mechanisms accordingly.With a proactive approach increasingly adopted in the business world, it is possible to detect and address tensions early, before they escalate. This is precisely where conflict sensitivity comes into play. 

It can be summarized as the ability to analyze, before an initiative begins, the potential impact of that initiative on its target group; to integrate this analysis into the existing system and team within the organization; and to continue it by involving other stakeholders if necessary. The goal here is to plan steps that create no harm either within the organization or among its stakeholders and target audiences. 

This is not a one-time assessment but an ongoing process of analysis that touches structural and systemic dimensions, seeking change at that level.However, addressing conflict sensitivity only from this structural perspective would be insufficient, it also has a discursive dimension. 

A system (or even a small project) designed to be conflict-sensitive can only succeed if it is supported by language that is inclusive, respectful of differences, participatory, and trust-building.

Therefore, when addressing tension management in meetings, it is important first to take a step back and ask key questions: 

Are there structural or discursive factors within the organization that might generate conflict? How do these factors affect existing teams, stakeholders, and target groups? Are we aware of the current power relations and their consequences? What could be done to transform them?

Talking about conflict sensitivity sometimes raises the question, “Are we avoiding conflicts?” On the contrary, a rights-based approach seeks to create mechanisms and environments that encourage individuals to express their views and demands about the current situation.

***

Conflict Strategies: Understanding the Approaches Behind Tension

Another way to understand the tensions that arise in meetings is to recognize how we each approach conflict.

Some of us immediately move toward finding a solution in moments of disagreement; some remain silent; others prefer to revisit the issue later. Each of these is a strategy, and each reflects a specific need. Developing awareness of these strategies is the first step toward moving from automatic reactions to conscious choices when facing tension or disagreement in meetings. After all, everyone comes to a meeting with a certain strategy; what makes the difference is being aware of how, why, and when those strategies are formed.

At the same time, developing this awareness also involves examining possible “power balances” at play.

Understanding Signs of Tension and Conflict in Meetings

Many of us define conflict in meetings by visible signs such as raised voices, direct objections, heated debates. 

Yet tension in meetings often resembles an iceberg; beneath the surface lies a much broader, more complex, and often unspoken structure. Implied dissatisfaction, participants who remain silent, or those who reluctantly agree to decisions are all parts of this hidden layer. Over time, these subtle signals can erode both the reliability of decisions and the health of relationships.

After identifying and interpreting these signs of tension, it becomes essential to ask how existing hierarchies and power dynamics (formal or informal) influence them.Recognizing the indicators of conflict in meetings also helps determine the stage of the conflict and thus the appropriate timing and type of intervention. 

For example, if dissatisfaction is expressed mostly through implied or passive-aggressive behavior, we are likely facing latent or potential conflicts. In such cases, bringing them to the surface becomes important. 

On the other hand, if the conflict is visible and overt (perhaps even in a crisis state), the question becomes when to intervene: immediately, or after emotions have settled? The answers to these questions will naturally shape the method and timing of intervention.

***

What About the Methods: 

Participatory Decision-Making: Focusing on Needs, Not Positions

The quality of decisions made in meetings depends less on how many people agree with them, and more on who is heard, and how.When we speak of decision-making methods here, we refer specifically to the dimension of participation. Because sometimes, particularly in crisis or urgent situations, leaders may need to make quick decisions without consultation. This article does not address those situations; instead, it focuses on what can be done when participation is needed.

In this context, a mediation approach can serve as a useful guide, just as it does in conflict resolution. 

When a meeting facilitator, leader, or manager adopts a mediating stance, it encourages participants to focus not on positions but on needs to seek common ground rather than justification for being “right.” 

This shift enables participants to explore the underlying reasons, interests, and concerns behind positions, rather than just what people want. Such an attitude allows individuals to move beyond the positional tendencies of defending themselves, refusing to yield, or treating disagreements as matters of pride, instead allows individuals to create space for more solution-oriented and lasting outcomes. 

In this way, a mediation mindset helps prevent escalation and contributes to meetings that are more inclusive and participatory.

Active Listening in Meetings: Sharing What We Understand, Not Just What We Hear

Among the most essential tools for understanding and managing conflicts are communication skills. We find it particularly important to narrow this focus to active listening skills, as these tools bring a “listen first” perspective to communication approaches that often emphasize speaking.

Think of those moments when everyone is talking, but no one is truly listening, how often that happens, doesn’t it? Yet listening can be far more transformative than speaking.

So, what kind of listening are we talking about?Here, it is important to address both the conceptual background and practical techniques of active listening. This helps participants understand the importance of hearing not only what is said, but also what remains unsaid. 

Techniques many of us already know such as reflecting, reframing, or asking questions may seem simple, yet they center on hearing and understanding. They help us answer the question, “How can I understand better?”

Recognizing the emotion behind a statement or the need within a sentence can entirely change the course of a meeting. Because often, what makes a meeting tense or prolonged is not disagreement over ideas, but the feeling of being misunderstood or not being understood at all.

***

Instead of a Conclusion: Learning Through Experience

All these themes show not only how to manage tension in meetings, but also how to understand and transform it. At Conflictus, we directly experience this approach in the training programs we design specifically for organizations.

In these step-by-step, interactive programs, we explore concepts such as conflict sensitivity, active listening, and participatory decision-making. All grounded in real meeting dynamics.

Through creative drama practices inspired by forum theatre, participants move beyond the role of observer; they become active players who intervene, test alternative solutions, and reflect on their own behaviors.

This experience opens space for discovering not only what to do but also what not to do. In doing so, we collectively recognize that tensions in meetings are not problems to be suppressed, but powerful opportunities for learning and transformation within teams.

And you? What about your experience?

How do you interpret the tensions that arise in meetings? Do you see them as something to suppress or to transform? Through what approaches do you experience this?

We’d be delighted to hear your thoughts…

---

Thank you for reading our post! At Conflictus, we eagerly await your feedback and insights.

Conflictus Conflict Resolution Training and Consultancy

🔗 Learn more about our services: Conflictus Website: https://www.conflictus.co/en

📢 Follow us on Twitter, LinkedIn, Instagram, Medium

📧 Contact us: info@conflictus.co