Conflict Resolution and Empowerment Training Course

Duration 5 days 10 modules · 33 contact hours
Level Intermediate Certificate on completion
Who attends Line Managers, Project Managers and others
Fee from USD 1,100 KSh 95,000 for Kenyan organisations
Where 52 cities + online See dates by city
Next start 16 Nov 2026 Course code SD-LD-250

Before you join: Participants should have experience supervising people, coordinating projects, leading workstreams or contributing to decisions involving several stakeholders.

Dates & prices

Two start dates a month in every city, and live online on weekdays or weekends. Fees are per participant; classroom fees include tuition, materials, lunch and refreshments, and the certificate.

Suggest a date or city

Showing the next six months. Later dates, other cities and private deliveries for your team are available on request.

Course overview

Unresolved conflict slows decisions, damages working relationships and creates inconsistent service for customers, citizens and internal stakeholders. Managers often face competing priorities, unclear authority, emotional conversations and pressure to act quickly. Without a disciplined approach, teams avoid necessary disagreements, escalate minor issues or make decisions without the people responsible for delivery. This course addresses the practical management task of resolving conflict while building accountable decision-making authority in teams.

Participants learn to diagnose the source and stage of conflict, select an appropriate response, prepare difficult conversations and negotiate workable agreements. They use the Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument, Interest-Based Relational approach, RACI and RAPID to clarify behaviour, decision rights and accountability. The course also covers de-escalation, mediation, evidence-based decisions, delegation boundaries, coaching questions and escalation routes for serious conduct, safety or policy matters.

Teaching combines short instructor briefings with sector-relevant cases, small-group analysis, structured conversation practice, decision simulations and facilitated reflection. Participants work with realistic scenarios such as disputed project priorities, customer-service failures, cross-functional approval delays, performance tensions and authority gaps. Each participant leaves with a conflict resolution and decision authority action plan, supported by reusable preparation templates, decision-rights models and delegation checklists. The five-day course is available in classrooms in more than 50 cities or live online, runs from 08:30 to 16:30 each day, and includes a certificate of completion.

What you will be able to do

  • Diagnose conflict sources, escalation signals and stakeholder interests using structured analysis
  • Select Thomas-Kilmann conflict responses suited to urgency, relationships and issue importance
  • Conduct difficult conversations using neutral language, active listening and clear requests
  • Negotiate agreements using interests, objective criteria, options and documented commitments
  • Design decision-rights arrangements using RACI and RAPID for recurring decisions
  • Delegate decisions with defined authority, guardrails, support and escalation thresholds
  • Facilitate informal mediation discussions that produce observable actions and review dates
  • Create a 30-day conflict resolution and team authority action plan

Benefits of attending

For you

  • Handle difficult conversations with clearer preparation and less avoidable escalation
  • Make defensible decisions when stakeholders hold competing priorities and incomplete information
  • Delegate work with explicit authority limits instead of repeated approval bottlenecks
  • Build credibility through fair process, consistent boundaries and documented agreements
  • Develop a practical action plan for a current workplace conflict or decision problem

For your organisation

  • Reduce delays caused by unresolved cross-functional disputes and unclear approvals
  • Improve decision quality through defined roles, evidence criteria and recorded rationale
  • Increase frontline responsiveness through controlled delegation and escalation thresholds
  • Lower the risk of inconsistent treatment in performance, conduct and stakeholder disputes
  • Create clearer accountability for commitments, follow-up actions and decision implementation

Course modules

10 modules over 5 days

Participants can identify conflict types, escalation signals and operational consequences before selecting a response.

  • Conflict costs mapped through delay, rework, absenteeism, turnover and stakeholder harm
  • Task, process, relationship and values conflicts distinguished using diagnostic questions
  • Escalation stages traced from disagreement through polarisation, coalition-building and breakdown
  • Early warning signals identified from language, behaviour, power and recurring patterns
  • Personal conflict triggers assessed through incident-based reflection and feedback
  • Psychological safety conditions linked to constructive dissent and issue reporting

Participants can choose and justify conflict responses based on the issue, relationship and available time.

  • Thomas-Kilmann modes matched to issue importance, relationship value and time
  • Competing responses distinguished from assertive, evidence-based advocacy
  • Accommodating choices tested against precedent, risk and commitment consequences
  • Avoiding decisions separated from deliberate cooling-off and issue deferral
  • Compromises evaluated for fairness, durability and hidden implementation costs
  • Mode selection assessed under authority, cultural and deadline constraints

Participants can prepare and conduct difficult conversations using factual language, listening and clear requests.

  • Conflict facts separated from interpretations, assumptions and emotionally loaded labels
  • Interest-Based Relational approach protects people while addressing problems directly
  • Opening statements structured around purpose, observations, impact and requested dialogue
  • Active listening uses paraphrasing, probing questions, summaries and emotion labels
  • Neutral language replaces blame, diagnosis, exaggeration and absolute claims
  • Conversation preparation records interests, alternatives, boundaries and desired agreements

Participants can de-escalate tense interactions while maintaining boundaries, fairness and appropriate safeguards.

  • Emotional flooding recognised through physiological cues, impulsive speech and withdrawal
  • Pause protocols restore self-management before responding to provocative remarks
  • Validation acknowledges experience without conceding disputed facts or accountability
  • De-escalation language lowers threat while preserving standards, boundaries and dignity
  • Power imbalances addressed through process safeguards, witnesses and documented expectations
  • Harassment, discrimination and safety allegations routed through formal reporting channels

Participants can negotiate agreements that address interests, constraints, ownership and implementation risk.

  • Positions translated into underlying interests, needs, constraints and priorities
  • Objective criteria selected from policy, market data, precedent and service standards
  • Options generated before commitment using contingent agreements and trade-off packages
  • Best alternatives assessed against settlement terms, relationship effects and implementation risk
  • Agreement terms specify owners, dates, evidence and review points
  • Deadlock responses use adjournment, mediation referral and senior escalation

Participants can structure decisions with clear roles, evidence criteria and recorded rationale.

  • Decision rights mapped using RACI roles for recurring cross-functional decisions
  • RAPID roles clarify recommenders, deciders, input providers and execution owners
  • Decision criteria weighted against strategic fit, risk, cost and stakeholder impact
  • Evidence quality tested for source credibility, recency, bias and uncertainty
  • Groupthink countered through dissent roles, independent estimates and challenge questions
  • Decision logs record rationale, assumptions, dissent, ownership and review triggers

Participants can assign decision authority that matches capability, risk and operational responsibility.

  • Decision authority defined through accountability, information, resources and formal approval
  • Delegation levels matched to competence, risk exposure and decision reversibility
  • Outcome boundaries specify non-negotiables, spending limits, escalation thresholds and measures
  • Coaching questions develop judgement without taking back assigned decisions
  • Information sharing enables frontline choices through timely operational and customer data
  • Authority gaps identified where responsibility exceeds access, skills or approval

Participants can delegate work clearly and address missed commitments without weakening accountability.

  • Delegation conversations agree purpose, outcomes, authority, support and check-in cadence
  • RACI handoffs tested for duplicated approvals, omissions and conflicting accountabilities
  • Performance expectations translated into observable standards, measures and decision guardrails
  • Feedback addresses missed commitments using facts, impact, inquiry and next steps
  • Corrective action distinguishes capability gaps, workload constraints and conduct issues
  • Recognition reinforces sound judgement, constructive challenge and responsible ownership

Participants can facilitate an impartial resolution process for workplace disagreements within their authority.

  • Informal mediation stages establish consent, confidentiality limits and shared ground rules
  • Separate meetings surface interests, risks, emotions and readiness for joint dialogue
  • Joint sessions manage speaking order, reframing and balanced participation
  • Agreement drafting converts verbal commitments into observable actions and timelines
  • Third-party neutrality maintained by separating process control from outcome preference
  • Escalation decisions distinguish managerial intervention, HR process and external mediation

Participants can apply course methods to a current workplace conflict and produce an implementation plan.

  • Conflict and decision patterns diagnosed from a live workplace case
  • Stakeholder map identifies authority, interests, alliances and communication needs
  • Resolution strategy combines conversation, negotiation, decision rights and escalation routes
  • Authority plan assigns delegated decisions, guardrails, resources and coaching support
  • Thirty-day action plan schedules conversations, checkpoints, measures and sponsor support
  • Personal commitments define one behaviour to start, stop and sustain

Exercises and examples are adapted to each cohort's sectors and roles.

What you take back to work

  1. Conflict diagnosis worksheet
  2. Difficult conversation preparation template
  3. Interest-based agreement record
  4. RACI and RAPID decision-rights map
  5. Delegation boundaries checklist
  6. 30-day conflict resolution action plan

Who should attend

  • Line Managers — resolve team tensions while maintaining delivery standards and accountability
  • Project Managers — address cross-functional disputes, delayed approvals and contested priorities
  • Department Heads — establish clear decision authority across teams and functions
  • HR Business Partners — support early resolution before formal employee-relations processes
  • Operations Managers — delegate frontline decisions without weakening controls or service quality
  • Programme Managers — manage stakeholder conflict across complex initiatives and governance structures

Skills and tools covered

Conflict diagnosisDifficult conversationsInterest-based negotiationDecision rightsAccountable delegationInformal mediation

Tools and standards

Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument, Interest-Based Relational Approach, RACI matrix, RAPID decision model

How the course runs

Training methodology

The course uses short instructor briefings to introduce methods, followed by case analysis, group exercises, role-based conversation simulations and structured peer feedback. Participants examine realistic management situations involving project conflict, service failures, competing stakeholder demands and delegation breakdowns. Decision-rights maps, conversation preparation sheets and agreement records are applied to current work issues. Facilitated application planning helps participants translate course methods into actions, measures, escalation routes and follow-up conversations for their own teams.

Requirements and prerequisites

Participants should have experience supervising people, coordinating projects, leading workstreams or contributing to decisions involving several stakeholders. Familiarity with workplace performance conversations, meetings and basic organisational reporting lines is useful. Participants should be prepared to examine real management situations while respecting confidentiality. No prior formal study of conflict management, negotiation, mediation, psychology, coaching or leadership theory is required. The course does not require legal, HR investigation or industrial-relations expertise, although participants should follow their employer's policies when applying course methods.

A typical training day

08:30 – 10:30First session
10:30 – 10:45Refreshment break
10:45 – 12:30Second session
12:30 – 13:30Lunch and networking
13:30 – 15:00Third session
15:00 – 15:15Refreshment break
15:15 – 16:30Workshop and daily review

Live online deliveries follow the same structure in East Africa Time, with shorter screen blocks and longer breaks.

What the fee includes

  • Instruction by a practitioner facilitator
  • Full course workbook and materials
  • Exercise files, templates and case studies
  • Refreshments and lunch on classroom deliveries
  • Certificate of completion
  • Post-course application plan

Frequently asked questions

Participants should have some experience managing people, projects, stakeholders or operational decisions. No formal training in negotiation, mediation, HR or leadership theory is required.

Participants should bring a non-confidential example of a current conflict, difficult decision or delegation problem. They may also bring relevant policies, reporting structures or decision processes where employer rules permit.

The course is designed for managers, project leaders, department heads, HR business partners and operational leaders. It is particularly useful for people who must resolve disagreements while maintaining delivery, fairness and accountability.

Negotiation and coaching are included as management methods, but the course has a wider focus on conflict diagnosis, decision rights, delegation and informal resolution. Participants learn how these methods fit together when managing real team and stakeholder issues.

Participants leave with preparation tools for difficult conversations, agreements and delegated decisions. The final module converts a current workplace issue into a 30-day action plan with owners, measures and review points.

The programme provides approximately 32.5 contact hours across five days, from 08:30 to 16:30 each day. Time is divided among instructor briefings, case work, group exercises, simulations, feedback and action planning.

Questions about this course?

Ask about dates, fees, group bookings or running it for your team. Our training team replies by email.