Most Workplace Conflict Isn’t Personal. It’s Predictable.
Most Workplace Conflict Is Not Personal
Most workplace conflict is not caused by bad intentions. It is caused by different assumptions.
Different assumptions about:
communication
urgency
feedback
decision-making
conflict
what good leadership looks like
and even what respect or appreciation feels like
Without self-awareness, teams tend to personalize those differences, which can turn into office politics, drama, gossip, or lower morale.
“She’s difficult.” “He’s controlling.” “She moves too slowly.” “He doesn't care.” “He micromanages.” “She dominates every conversation.” “They don’t listen.”
But often, the issue is not character. It’s how we’re wired.
The Value of a Shared Language
Tools like the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, the 6 Types of Working Genius™, Kolbe, and Motivational Maps do not solve organizational problems on their own.
But they do provide something incredibly valuable: a shared language.
Language that helps teams better understand:
why one person processes externally while another needs time to think
why one leader pushes for quick decisions while another prioritizes buy-in
why some people naturally gravitate toward innovation while others thrive in execution
why certain work energizes one person and drains another
These assessments are not meant to stereotype or put anyone in a box, but rather to help us understand how people approach work from fundamentally different instincts, priorities, and communication styles.
What This Looked Like in Our Own Leadership
When I first began working with my husband, Michael Sullivan, CEO and founder of Sullivan Practice LLC, an organizational health consulting firm, after leaving my career in educational leadership with New York City Public Schools, there were definitely some touch-and-go moments.
How many times have we heard people say, “I could never work with my spouse”?
But for us, learning how to work together became another important part of building a healthy life together — no different than navigating finances, vacations, weekend plans, or everyday responsibilities.
We quickly realized that we naturally approached work differently.
Michael tends to operate from vision, innovation, and strategic possibility. His competenies align with Invention and Discernment in the Working Genius™ assessment — the 25,000-foot perspective focused on ideas, judgment, and organizational direction. I naturally thrive toward Enablement and Tenacity — the ground-level and runway work of support, execution, follow-through, and ensuring commitments actually happen.
Michael's Myers-Briggs Type Indicator is ENTJ ["Extroverted, Intuitive, Thinking, Judging"] while I’m ESFJ ["Extroverted, Sensing, Feeling, Judging"] which helped explain many of the differences in how we naturally approached leadership, communication, and decision-making. ENTJs often prioritize efficiency, strategy, and directness, while ESFJs tend to value harmony, relational trust, and stability.
These differences often show up in everyday workplace dynamics you see. For example:
• A high “T” (Thinking) team member may prioritize direct, efficient feedback, while a high “F” (Feeling) team member may be more sensitive to tone and relational context.
• A high “J” (Judging) team member may prefer structure, deadlines, and clearly defined expectations, while a high “P” (Perceiving) team member may thrive with flexibility, adaptability, and room to pivot as new information emerges.
Neither approach is inherently better, just different.
Different Does Not Mean Deficient
Michael and I, like many of the teams we consult, were operating from different working strengths.
We realized our combination is incredibly effective in leadership and marriage once we stopped interpreting differences as deficiencies and started applying the same principles we teach teams.
Once we understood this, clarity became essential.
Delegation
Communication
Who must do what? (Critical Question #6 from Patrick Lencioni’s organizational health framework.)
So we became intentional.
We hold tactical meetings. We hold topical meetings. We leave conversations with clear commitments and accountability.
And as we better understood our personalities, working styles, and leadership tendencies, something shifted: We began assuming best intent.
What once felt frustrating or difficult often turned out to be a different way of processing information, solving problems, or making decisions.
What Healthy Teams Learn to Ask
With clearer communication and greater self-awareness:
conflict became healthier
frustration decreased
assumptions faded
trust deepened
The healthiest teams stop asking:
“Why isn’t everyone like me?”
And start asking:
“What strength does this person bring that I naturally do not?”
If this resonates with challenges your team is navigating, we’d be glad to start a conversation. Sullivan Practice facilitates tools like Working Genius™, Myers-Briggs, and organizational health frameworks to help leadership teams communicate more effectively, reduce unnecessary friction, and build healthier cultures.