Management: how can you spot silent conflicts?

To begin with, could you please introduce yourself and explain how you support businesses facing internal tensions?

I am a consultant specialising in organisational dynamics and managerial tensions. I work with organisations of all sizes, in both the private and public sectors.

After more than nine years’ experience in HR across a variety of corporate, institutional and public sector settings, I have chosen to focus on themes that have preoccupied me throughout my career: internal tensions, unspoken issues, and the consequences they ultimately bring about. These are issues that people are often unable to address from within, for fear of reprisals or of losing their job.

This shift took place whilst I was at university, during a course on behavioural ethics that immediately struck a chord: it finally put into words the mechanisms I had been observing from within organisations. Since then, I have developed a practice rooted in behavioural ethics – the study of real human behaviour in the face of ethical dilemmas – complemented by social psychology and organisational research.

In practical terms, I take a systemic approach: individual interviews, and sometimes group workshops, involving all relevant stakeholders and all levels of the organisation. Trust is the prerequisite for everything else; it alone enables us to explore in depth topics that are rarely spoken about. This enables me to map out tensions and identify areas for focus from a broader perspective. My aim is never to apportion blame, but to understand the dynamics at play so that I can address the root causes of the problem.

This fieldwork also informs the training programmes I design and deliver for managers and HR professionals, all centred on the same question: how to maintain a clear head and make sound decisions when a situation is neither entirely black nor entirely white.

What are the most common things people don’t say that you come across in the workplace, and why are they so difficult to put into words?

Much of what goes unsaid centres on the hierarchy: a lack of clarity regarding roles and responsibilities, and conflicting instructions, whether between members of the hierarchy or between staff and their superiors.

These issues remain unspoken because bringing them up leaves people vulnerable. Questioning a poorly defined role sometimes means calling into question the organisation itself, or the person who set it up. In certain corporate cultures, being loyal means never questioning anything: asking a question about a decision or a role is then seen as disloyal criticism rather than a legitimate contribution.

Added to this is a calculation, usually an unconscious one: the person who speaks up takes the risk alone, whilst the benefit, if there is one, is enjoyed by everyone. As long as this imbalance remains uncorrected, keeping quiet remains the most sensible choice, even when everyone is aware of the same problem. This is sometimes referred to as a lack of psychological safety: without a framework that makes speaking out safe, people remain silent.

Gradually, something deeper takes hold: the conviction that thinking or making suggestions is pointless anyway, that you just have to get on with it, without asking any questions. You end up telling yourself that it’s like that everywhere, that the workplace is a jungle where everyone has to look after themselves. This belief isolates you, and a form of silent suffering sets in, made all the more difficult to put into words because it has come to seem like the norm.

What are the first signs that should alert a manager or HR representative that a silent conflict is developing?

The first signs are often subtle, and can be detected in both verbal and non-verbal communication. On the verbal side, one might notice a person holding back from giving their opinion, a decline in suggestions, and decisions being accepted without question. On the non-verbal side, there is an avoidance of eye contact, prolonged silences following a question asked in a meeting, and a tone that becomes more subdued where there used to be greater spontaneity.

Next comes a more widespread disengagement: people are less committed than before. Staff turnover remains a good indicator, but by the time it becomes apparent, the damage is already deep-seated, especially if it has come to be accepted as «normal» without any attempt to identify the root cause. Those identified as high-potential employees are often the first to leave: they find other opportunities more easily and have the courage to seize them.

Finally, there are more individual signs: absences becoming more frequent, a sick leave period that drags on, or a tone that becomes defensive rather than open. One important point to bear in mind, in my view: these signs do not indicate people to be watched, but symptoms to be heeded. Someone who withdraws or is frequently absent is often saying out loud, in their own way, what the group as a whole does not yet dare to voice. The right approach is therefore not to single out the individual, but to ask ourselves what it is about the way we work together that is causing this withdrawal.

In practical terms, what do these unresolved tensions ultimately cost an organisation, whether in terms of the quality of decisions, innovation or performance?

Let’s consider a common scenario: a team where tensions have been simmering for several months. On the surface, everything still seems to be running smoothly; deliverables are being produced and meetings are taking place. But decisions are being made without any real debate, disagreements are no longer being raised, and everyone is protecting their own turf rather than seeking the best collective solution.

This has a direct impact on results: poorer decisions due to a lack of genuine debate, mistakes corrected later than they should have been, and a decline in the capacity for innovation because differing views are no longer being shared. At the level of a team or a department, these slowdowns and declines in quality eventually take their toll, even if they remain invisible for years at a time.

A loss of trust, too, has a very tangible cost: when trust declines, everything becomes slower and more cumbersome. We double-check, we document, we cover our backs, and we set up more and more checks. The energy that used to be channelled into moving forward is now spent on protecting ourselves.

The true cost of these tensions – the cost of missed decisions and eroded trust – always precedes the indicators that eventually go haywire. And it is generally higher than what these indicators, once they have sounded the alarm, are able to measure.

What would be your first piece of advice to a company that feels that «something isn’t quite right», but where nobody dares to put the problem into words?

The very first step does not involve any particular tool. It lies in a shift in perspective: resisting the urge to look for someone to blame, and instead asking ourselves what it is, in the way we work together, that creates this silence. As long as we are looking for someone to blame, communication closes off a little more.

Next, we must be clear-eyed: even when carried out with the best of intentions, an assessment made from within is almost always biased, even when it is broadly accurate. Those affected are reluctant to speak out, either because they have already done so without being heard, or because they do not feel confident or entitled to do so. What people are willing to say from within is inevitably filtered.

Hence my advice: create a neutral and confidential space for listening, with an external person, outside the usual hierarchical relationships. It is this framework, rather than a ready-made solution, that enables people to speak freely. An outside perspective then helps to put what has been heard into perspective and to transform vague feelings into concrete observations on which real action can be taken.

Cindy Carvalho is a consultant and FSEA-certified trainer specialising in organisational dynamics and managerial tensions, and the founder of YouChronia. For more information, visit youchronia.ch.