When conflict isn’t personal: How role clarity reduces workplace tension

Conflict at work is often framed in emotional or interpersonal terms—personality clashes, poor communication, or misaligned values. But sometimes, what looks like a personal conflict is really the result of unclear roles, responsibilities, and decision-making authority. When people are left to interpret their boundaries for themselves, friction is almost inevitable.

A recent mediation I conducted illustrates this clearly. It involved two capable, committed professionals: a software developer and an administrator responsible for managing content on the organisation’s online platform. On the surface, it appeared they were at odds. The administrator had asked the developer to make changes to the platform, but the developer didn’t action these requests. He felt overwhelmed, believed she was directing him without authority, and prioritised more urgent technical issues. She, in turn, felt ignored, frustrated, and unclear about how to get changes made—especially when small updates were repeatedly delayed or dismissed.

Tensions escalated. Eventually, what might have been a simple workflow issue became a breakdown in communication and trust. Both parties felt disrespected, and the team dynamics suffered.

The real issue: No shared understanding of roles or authority

As the mediation unfolded, it became clear that neither party knew who had authority to make decisions about changes to the platform. The administrator assumed responsibility for managing platform content included directing changes. The developer, focused on technical integrity and user issues, saw her requests as low priority and optional.

There were no agreed procedures, no documented expectations, and no clarity about who got the final say. Each person operated from their own assumptions, which created misaligned expectations and escalating frustration.

When people don’t know what’s expected, they fill in the gaps.

In this case, in the absence of clear guidance:

• The administrator interpreted lack of response as disregard.

• The developer interpreted her requests as overstepping.

• Both stopped communicating effectively.

• Emotions intensified and collaboration broke down.

This is not unusual. In many workplaces, conflict isn’t about poor intent—it’s about poor infrastructure. People want to do the right thing, but they don’t know what “the right thing” looks like in their context.

Recommendations for moving forward

Resolving workplace conflict is rarely about just patching things up—it’s about addressing the underlying causes. In this case, that meant more than just facilitating a conversation between the two individuals. It required changes to the environment they were working in.

Here are four steps any organisation can take to reduce the likelihood of role-based conflict:

1. Mediation as a circuit breaker

A structured, facilitated conversation helps individuals express concerns, acknowledge impacts, and reset the working relationship. It creates space for mutual understanding and agreement on how to move forward.

2. Update and clarify position descriptions

When roles are loosely defined or outdated, misunderstandings flourish. Clear, current job descriptions help everyone understand their own responsibilities and where others’ authority begins.

3. Develop simple, transparent guidelines and procedures

There should be a shared understanding of:

• How to request changes

• How priorities are determined

• Who has authority to approve or implement those changes

Documented processes help reduce ambiguity and remove the burden of interpretation.

4. Ensure managers provide visible, consistent direction

In this case, the absence of a team leader for several months contributed to the confusion. When no one is making decisions or reinforcing expectations, people fall back on personal judgement—which often leads to conflict. Managers need to:

• Confirm who has decision-making authority

• Set expectations for how teams will work together

• Intervene early to address emerging tensions

The bottom line: clarity provides harmony

When people know what’s expected, who decides what, and how to get things done, they’re far more likely to work effectively—and harmoniously. Conflict doesn’t disappear, but it becomes more manageable and less personal.

If your team is experiencing persistent tension, don’t just look at who’s clashing. Ask what’s missing in the system that’s causing the friction. Chances are, what looks like a personality problem might actually be a process problem in disguise.