What does The Traitors reveal about conflict resolution?
- sarah270912
- Sep 16
- 3 min read
In many ways, conflict is inevitable. It’s normal to encounter people with opposite opinions or characters in day-to-day life, and the workplace is no exception – in fact, it’s probably one of the most susceptible environments to conflict, given that we spend up to five days a week there.
Throughout my career, I’ve supported and implemented many conflict resolution strategies across businesses. Peacefully resolving disputes is integral to effective leadership, and it’s all about finding the right process to match a business’s unique leadership style and culture. When this happens, normal service can continue with minimal disruption.
If a disagreement is ignored, it could spiral into a bigger issue that impacts others and, ultimately, the business’s productivity.
Effective conflict handling requires empathy, open communication and emotional intelligence. It’s not easy to master, but it’s certainly important. In fact, author, Patrick Lencioni, famously said that an inability to manage conflict is one of the five dysfunctions of a team:
Where does The Traitors fit into this?
TV show, The Traitors, pits players against one another in a bid to win a cash prize. Beginning with around 20 contestants, some are secretly assigned the role of a ‘traitor’ while others remain ‘faithful’. The aim is then for the faithfuls to successfully identify and banish the traitors.
As many will know, it’s an incredibly psychological game, with rumour mills whirling and players frequently deceiving one another. And once every episode, players gather at the ‘round table’ to try and uncover the traitors through a face-to-face debate.
The conflict can be heated and it’s hard to ignore the parallels it draws to conflict in the workplace.
The show has garnered such high viewing figures that it now takes place throughout numerous countries – from the UK to the US, New Zealand, Australia, The Netherlands and more.
Spotting trends in conflict resolution
When analysing each iteration of the show, it becomes clear that the gameplay differs substantially. It’s interesting to spot certain trends in behaviour, deception, trust, group dynamics and conflict resolution.
For example, some people demonstrate a reserved and polite attitude, even when secretly lying to another player, while others opt for direct, confrontational communication and openly invite debates that others may find uncomfortable.
When it comes to conflict resolution, some underplay issues or wrap them in positivity to put an end to things, while others welcome emotional expression – frequently crying, shouting and arguing. On the other hand, many maintain a more stoic approach, with no room for emotions.
These themes/traits are fairly universal, and many may recognise themselves or others in one or more of them, but the variety itself highlights the subjectivity of conflict resolution. Conflict is something everyone handles differently, so naturally, there’s no ‘one size fits all’ solution.
Offering a private, structured intervention – perhaps in a one-to-one setting with anonymous input – could work well in some of these scenarios, for example, whereas others may respond better to a ‘straight talking’ approach with large-scale meetings.
Learning from others
For business leaders, there’s valuable insight to gain from observing how others, like those in The Traitors, handle conflict.
When considering some of the themes outlined above, we might ask ourselves the following when contemplating conflict resolution in the workplace:
● Does direct communication and open disagreement equate to faster resolutions?
● Does hidden tension and indirect communication require subtle mediation?
● Does high individualism and personality clashes lead to assertiveness over harmony?
● Does emotional restraint risk a level of unspoken conflict
Businesses bring together a range of different people with their own unique characters, so whatever the scenario, it’s important to keep an open mind – not only ensuring that people’s psychological safety, trust and inclusion remains at the forefront, but actively listening to them and adopting a considered approach. When we effectively seek to understand different points of view and hold space for different experiences and perspectives, a common ground can be established.
References
Comments