logo
How to manage responses to stress and conflict

How to manage responses to stress and conflict

As a business owner or leader, you're no stranger to conflict, whether it's hearing something uncomfortable or delivering a message others may not want to receive.
In these situations, you might brace for the classic "fight or flight" reaction and feel relieved if things stay calm. But just because someone agrees, stays silent, or makes a joke doesn't mean they've truly accepted what was said.
The "fight or flight" stress response evolved to help mammals survive life-threatening danger. It triggers an instant surge of hormones and physiological changes that prepare us to confront a threat or run from it.
While modern life rarely involves being chased by sabre-toothed tigers, many of us still live with chronic, low-level stress. As a result, we can overreact to situations that are not truly dangerous, like a difficult conversation at work.
In fact, we now understand there are more than just two instinctive responses to stress. I regularly see these play out in the conflicts I help resolve.
Table 1 outlines seven different stress responses I observe and how leaders can respond constructively. Recognising these behaviours can help you lead more effectively, manage team dynamics with greater insight, and avoid costly misunderstandings.
People's reactions to conflict are varied and often misleading. Leaders frequently take surface behaviour at face value:
— The quiet one agrees quickly, so we can "get on with it."
— The person avoiding meetings is "just busy."
— The one who gets fired up is labelled "difficult."
But if you misread these reactions, you risk making poor decisions without genuine buy-in. Worse, team members may feel overlooked or misunderstood, leading to resentment or disengagement.
Being able to recognise and respond to these patterns helps you not only diffuse conflict but also build trust. When your team feels safe to speak honestly, you benefit from their real views, not just their filtered responses. Developing this kind of emotional intelligence starts with being curious, not reactive.
Often, these reactions are rooted in self-protection. People who have experienced trauma — or who didn't grow up with emotionally safe relationships — may react more strongly.
According to American psychotherapist Pete Walker, individuals who received "good enough parenting" tend to develop a healthy mix of these responses and apply them flexibly depending on the situation.
For example, in a workplace setting, someone might draw on a bit of "fight" to be assertive without becoming aggressive. Or they might lean into "freeze" and choose not to have the last word, letting a tense moment pass.
If you are dealing with someone reacting strongly, Table 1 includes practical ways to respond without escalating the situation. Often the best move is to take a pause and set a time to return to the conversation when emotions have settled and the rational brain is back online.
And sometimes it is actually you who may be reacting unhelpfully. Learning to manage your own stress responses is another skill entirely, and one that is well worth developing, perhaps with the support of a coach or counsellor.
But whatever you do, please don't measure your success by how you react to any teenagers in your life. They are a special type of human who are designed to push our buttons!
— Kate Keddell is a mediator of workplace and business disputes at www.katekeddell.co.nz
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

UK drops 'backdoor' mandate for Apple: spy chief
UK drops 'backdoor' mandate for Apple: spy chief

Otago Daily Times

time14 hours ago

  • Otago Daily Times

UK drops 'backdoor' mandate for Apple: spy chief

Britain has dropped its demand for iPhone maker Apple to provide a "backdoor" that would have enabled access to protected encrypted data of American citizens, US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard says. Gabbard issued the statement on X on Monday in the United States, saying she had worked for months with Britain, along with President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance, to arrive at a deal. British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer was in Washington on Monday along with other European leaders to meet Trump and discuss Russia's war in Ukraine. A spokesperson for the British government said on Tuesday that, while they would not comment on any agreement, Britain had long worked with the US to tackle security threats while seeking to protect the privacy of citizens in both countries. "We will always take all actions necessary at the domestic level to keep UK citizens safe," the spokesperson added. Apple did not immediately respond to requests for comment on Gabbard's statement. US lawmakers said in May this year that the United Kingdom's order to Apple to create a backdoor to its encrypted user data could be exploited by cybercriminals and authoritarian governments. Apple, which has said it would never build such access into its encrypted services or devices, had challenged the order at the UK's Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT). The iPhone maker withdrew its Advanced Data Protection feature for British users in February following the UK order. Users of Apple's iPhones, Macs and other devices can enable the feature to ensure that only they - and not even Apple - can unlock data stored on its cloud. US officials said earlier this year they were examining whether Britain broke a bilateral agreement by demanding that Apple build a backdoor allowing the British government to access backups of data in the company's encrypted cloud storage systems. In a letter dated February 25 to US lawmakers, Gabbard said the US was examining whether the UK government had violated the CLOUD Act, which bars it from issuing demands for the data of US citizens and vice versa. Cybersecurity experts told Reuters that if Apple chose to build a backdoor for a government, that backdoor would eventually be found and exploited by hackers. Apple has sparred with regulators over encryption as far back as 2016 when the US government tried to compel it to build a tool to unlock the iPhone of a suspected extremist.

Tesla backtracks on stalkless cabins
Tesla backtracks on stalkless cabins

NZ Autocar

time15 hours ago

  • NZ Autocar

Tesla backtracks on stalkless cabins

Tesla is partially reversing one of its most controversial design decisions, reintroducing steering column stalks to the Model 3 – at least in China. The American EV maker removed indicator and gear selector stalks from the Model 3 in 2023, moving their functions onto the touchscreen and steering wheel controls. While the move was billed as part of Tesla's push toward simplicity, not all owners warmed to the change. Trying to use the indicators while also turning, as you would do when negotiating a round a bout, proved troublesome. Now, new Model 3s delivered in China will once again feature a turn signal stalk as standard. Existing owners will also be able to retrofit the part through Tesla Service Centres for a fee of 2,499 yuan (around NZ$350). Eligibility begins with cars built after 7 February 2025, with earlier vehicles to follow at a later date. Read more 2024 Tesla Model 3 RWD review For now, the retrofit is only confirmed for China, with no word on availability in the United States or other markets. Some aftermarket solutions already exist, ranging from stick-on units to fully integrated steering column conversions, catering to drivers who miss the convenience of a physical stalk. The debate isn't limited to the Model 3. Tesla's wider line-up has also been affected by the company's stalk-free approach, with none of its current US models featuring a traditional gear selector. The updated Model Y is the only Tesla sold globally with a turn signal stalk fitted as standard. This is not the first time Tesla has walked back a bold design experiment. In 2021, the refreshed Model S launched with a futuristic yoke steering wheel, with CEO Elon Musk insisting at the time it would be the default setup going forward. Just two years later, Tesla reinstated a conventional round wheel as standard, relegating the yoke to a NZ$1,600 option on the high-performance Model S Plaid and Model X Plaid. Tesla has long prided itself on challenging automotive conventions, but its latest U-turn highlights that not all drivers are ready to abandon tried-and-true ergonomics. After all, stalks have been around for decades for a reason: they're simple, safe, and they work.

RNZ an easy target for flailing Goldsmith
RNZ an easy target for flailing Goldsmith

Newsroom

time3 days ago

  • Newsroom

RNZ an easy target for flailing Goldsmith

Comment: Melissa Lee was dumped as Minister for Media and Communications for being, in her own words, 'a little slow'. Lee had done nothing in her six-month tenure and resembled an opossum in the headlights when Newshub closed and TVNZ slashed staff numbers. If the same rules applied, Lee's replacement, Paul Goldsmith, should also be handing the portfolio over to the next hopeful. In his 12-month reign, Goldsmith has failed to strengthen the media presence in New Zealand – the job given to him by his boss, Christopher Luxon. He hailed Sky's $1 takeover of Three as a welcome investment in local media. It was, of course, the American owners admitting defeat and bailing out. This might be harsh, but Goldsmith's one achievement seems to have been getting walked over by Google and Facebook. Since Goldsmith gave up on plans to force these global giants into paying for news, Google has voluntarily started renewing content deals that were in place before the last election. These deals pump millions into the media sector including RNZ and TVNZ. Under pressure to be seen to be doing something, anything, Goldsmith has turned his sights on an easier target – RNZ. Easier in multiple ways. No one in the coalition Government is going to stand up for RNZ. Act doesn't think there is any need for the public broadcaster and NZ First leader, Winston Peters, seems bent on revenge for a perceived lack of reporting on his party's successes. The Prime Minister struggles with his own performances in the media and is unlikely to deter Goldsmith from selecting RNZ as a whipping boy. RNZ's falling radio ratings are a soft target for Goldsmith to zero in on. The connection between a falling audience and management failure is an easy concept to push and a hard one to defend. Further slides in the ratings following Goldsmith's pronouncements left RNZ's CEO Paul Thompson in a very tough spot. As well as indirect pressure from Goldsmith, Thompson would have felt the heat from a new (Goldsmith appointed) board member, Brent Impey. Impey is a veteran of commercial radio, where ratings are everything. The current chair, Jim Mather, would also see the need for action. Appointed chair during Labour's time in office, Mather is an ex-military man who understands the chain of command and always does things by the book. He would have felt the need to respond to Goldsmith's concerns even if he didn't agree with them. Thompson decided on a bold move. He contracted RNZ's former news boss, Richard Sutherland, to produce a report looking at the reasons behind the ratings slide and possible solutions. Thompson would have known that Sutherland, who left RNZ in August 2023 after five years as head of news, was unlikely to take prisoners. It was hardly a secret in media circles that Sutherland had become frustrated with parts of the organisation's structure including the archaic separation of news and digital (RNZ's web content). He was furious at what he saw as a lack of accountability from those overseeing online during the Russian propaganda fiasco in mid 2023. Thompson would also have known that Sutherland's report would end up in the public arena. RNZ is subject to the Official Information Act and competing media, particularly NZME, delight in opportunities to cast the state broadcaster in a negative light. What Thompson possibly didn't anticipate was how big a swing Sutherland would take at his old employer. In a report most media have described as 'highly critical' or 'scathing' Sutherland criticised the quality of on-air work, the amount of time staffers are allowed to work from home and a Wellington bias in its news selection. But perhaps the most interesting revelation in the report is that interviews conducted by Sutherland revealed most of the staff see radio as a sunset industry. It is not hard to imagine Goldsmith and Impey (who will probably chair RNZ after Mather retires from the board) saying 'gotcha' as they read that part of the report. There is no doubt RNZ has undergone a culture change in the past few years. After Sutherland left, he was replaced as news boss by Mark Stevens from Stuff. Sutherland grew up in commercial radio and TV – he is a broadcaster through and through. Stevens has no radio experience but is well regarded for his digital know how. In many ways Stevens has been a good hire for RNZ. With Megan Whelan (Head of Content) they have dramatically broadened the range and scope of RNZ's online offering. This has led to rapid growth in RNZ's online audience, helped by Newshub's closure and spikes in readership of one-off lifestyle or fast-twitch content. If RNZ was private media company, its executive would have been praised for the successful investment in online media. But the inability to slow the rate decline of radio audiences is now creating huge pressure on Thompson and his team. Whelan has resigned and RNZ has advertised for a 'Chief Audio Officer.' Turning around the ratings will be hard, partly because the staff view that radio is a 'sunset industry' is not exactly wrong. Like audiences of most legacy media with linear offerings, it will keep declining but the end of the medium is someway off yet. Sutherland suggested a 'high profile' hire would be an important step on the road to redemption, but who? NZME will desperately hold on to its stars and on-air talent from the failed Today FM have mainly drifted out of the industry. Ex-TV3 journalists like Paddy Gower, Duncan Garner, Rebecca Wright and Melissa Chan-Green are names being mentioned and no doubt considered, but the search for outside talent also highlights RNZ's failure to develop more of its own presenters into top performers. Who is the next Kim Hill? Katherine Ryan is probably the closest to a Hill-type RNZ has, but is in the later stages of her career. The Sutherland report also presents Thompson, now the country's longest serving media CEO, with another problem. It paints a picture of failure; failure to address problems that have built up over years. Radio stations take time to turn around and it usually requires myriad small changes as well as major ones. The RNZ board will be acutely aware the underperforming media minister Paul Goldsmith won't want to hear that. He will want a quick result to improve his own scoreboard.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store