Managing conflict in the workplace

A common but manageable question

This kind of question comes up frequently in situational judgement stations, and while it can feel intimidating, it’s actually fairly straightforward once you know the principles interviewers are listening for. The key is making sure your answer naturally covers each of them, rather than jumping straight to “I’d just talk to them.”

Key principles to include

• Active listening — hear both sides fully, without interrupting or forming a judgement too early. Both parties need to feel genuinely heard, not just processed.
• Empathy — show that you understand where each person is coming from, even if you don’t necessarily agree with either position. This helps de-escalate tension rather than making people feel defensive.
• Neutrality — avoid taking sides. Your role in resolving conflict is to stay impartial, so both parties trust that the outcome is fair rather than favouring one person.
• Problem-solving — rather than simply calming things down in the moment, aim to get to the actual root cause of the disagreement, and work with both people to find a solution collaboratively, rather than imposing one yourself.

Why this question is being asked

At its core, this question is checking whether you can work well within a team, and whether you’d be someone who helps resolve tension rather than someone who avoids it or makes it worse. This applies directly to two settings you’ll encounter: group sessions during medical school, such as PBL, where disagreements between peers are inevitable, and later, working as a doctor within a hospital team, where unresolved conflict between colleagues can genuinely affect patient care if left unaddressed.

A simple way to shape your answer

• Explain that you’d first listen to both individuals separately (or together, depending on the situation), giving each person space to explain their perspective without interruption.
• Show empathy toward both sides, rather than immediately deciding who’s “right.”
• Make clear you’d remain neutral throughout, not favouring either colleague.
• Describe how you’d work with both people to identify the actual source of the disagreement, rather than just smoothing over the symptoms.
• Aim to reach a resolution collaboratively, rather than dictating a solution yourself.
• Close by linking this back to why it matters in medicine — both in team-based learning at medical school, and in maintaining a functional, safe working environment as a doctor.