The Thomas-Kilmann Conflict Mode Instrument (TKI) is one of the world’s most widely used tools for assessing how individuals handle conflict.
Developed by Dr. Kenneth W. Thomas and Dr. Ralph H. Kilmann in 1974, it identifies five distinct “modes” of responding to conflict based on two primary dimensions: Assertiveness (satisfying one’s own concerns) and Cooperativeness (satisfying the other person’s concerns).
The model is used extensively in corporate leadership training, HR mediation, and team-building to help professionals understand that no single conflict style is “best.”
Instead, the effectiveness of a mode depends on the specific situation.
The Five Conflict-Handling Modes
| Mode | Assertiveness | Cooperativeness | Description |
| Competing | High | Low | Pursuing your own concerns at the other person’s expense. It is a power-oriented mode. |
| Collaborating | High | High | Working with the other person to find a “win-win” solution that fully satisfies both parties. |
| Compromising | Medium | Medium | Finding an expedient, mutually acceptable solution that partially satisfies both parties. |
| Avoiding | Low | Low | Sidestepping the conflict, postponing the issue, or withdrawing from a threatening situation. |
| Accommodating | Low | High | Neglecting your own concerns to satisfy the concerns of the other person; an element of self-sacrifice. |
Real Business Examples
To understand how these modes function in the real world, consider how different companies and industries apply them strategically:
Competing: Rapid Decisions at Amazon
In high-stakes environments like Amazon, the company’s “Leadership Principles” include a “Have Backbone; Disagree and Commit” clause. In urgent situations—such as a critical server outage or a time-sensitive product launch—a leader might use the Competing mode to push through a decision they know is technically sound, even if it is unpopular, to ensure the company moves fast and remains competitive.
Collaborating: Post-Merger Integration at Activision Blizzard
When large firms merge, such as the historical consolidation within Activision Blizzard, internal teams often have radically different cultures and workflows. Management frequently uses the Collaborating mode during these transitions. By bringing together lead programmers from different legacy teams to co-design a new shared engine, they ensure that both teams’ technical concerns are met, creating a superior “win-win” infrastructure for future games.
Compromising: Commercial Real Estate Negotiations
In the real estate industry, such as during a lease negotiation between a global retailer like Starbucks and a property developer, a Compromising mode is often the standard. The retailer might want a lower rent, while the developer wants a longer lease term. They meet in the middle—the retailer pays slightly more than their target but gets the developer to cover more of the interior “build-out” costs. Both parties walk away with their primary needs partially met so the deal doesn’t collapse.
Avoiding: Trivial Disputes at Microsoft
In large-scale software development at firms like Microsoft, technical teams often have small, “trivial” disagreements about non-functional aesthetic choices in internal tools. Senior managers may consciously use the Avoiding mode, choosing not to intervene in these minor debates. This allows the team to resolve the issue organically (or let it fade) so that management can focus their energy on high-priority architectural conflicts that actually impact the product’s performance.
Accommodating: Customer Service at Zappos
The online retailer Zappos is famous for its Accommodating approach to customer conflict. If a customer is unhappy with a product, the representative is empowered to prioritize the relationship over the immediate cost of the transaction. By “yielding” and offering a full refund plus a gift card, they neglect the short-term profit concern (low assertiveness) to maximize customer loyalty (high cooperativeness), which pays off in long-term brand equity.
Practical Application for Teams
The TKI is often used as a diagnostic tool.
If a team’s collective profile shows a high “Avoiding” score, it may indicate a “polite” culture where critical issues are swept under the rug, leading to stagnation.
Conversely, a team high in “Competing” may suffer from high turnover and burnout.