Grievance and Fear in Complaints and Conflict Work: Why Curiosity Matters More Than Labels
- Shiv Martin
- Jun 23
- 5 min read
Updated: 20 hours ago
Why Curiosity Matters More Than Labels in Conflict Resolution
In my workshops on de-escalation, managing challenging interactions, and complaints handling, one theme keeps emerging: people are searching for certainty. They want to understand and explain the challenging behaviours they encounter at work. When someone is angry, demanding, or highly emotional, there is a natural desire to categorise what is happening.
Conflict and complaints work can be emotionally draining. It’s tough to remain patient, compassionate, and fair when facing frustration, criticism, and conflict daily. This challenge intensifies when workloads are high and resources are limited.
The Allure of Labels
I’ve noticed that many popular training sessions, books, and conference presentations in this field focus heavily on labels. These labels can be clinical, behavioural, or even organisational, such as “vexatious complainant” or “high-conflict person.” They often provide a checklist for diagnosing a particular type of person.
While these concepts can be useful when applied thoughtfully, problems arise when labels become shorthand for how we engage with individuals. This is especially relevant in environments dealing with persistent complaints and high-demand stakeholders, a topic I explore further in my article on Timewasters in Dispute Resolution Systems..
Understanding Challenging Behaviours
My workshops often encourage deep reflection on the causes of challenging behaviours. Participants have included complaints professionals, student support staff, HR practitioners, managers, dispute resolution practitioners, and regulatory teams. Here are some insights we've gained together.
One reason this type of resource is popular is that it offers relief. If someone's behaviour can be explained by a category or diagnosis, the situation feels less personal. We no longer need to wrestle with uncertainty or the complexity of what we need to do. We have an explanation, and it lets us off the hook.
For professionals working in complaints and dispute resolution, that explanation can feel validating. It confirms that the behaviour is difficult, reassures us that we are not imagining the challenge, and provides a framework for understanding why someone is acting the way they are.
The Risks of Over-Reliance on Labels
However, relief and accuracy are not always the same. In my experience, one of the greatest risks in complaints handling is becoming too attached to our own explanation of what is happening. Once we believe we know what kind of person someone is, we often stop being curious about what is actually driving their behaviour.
This tendency is particularly common in complaints management and regulatory dispute resolution environments, where staff are exposed to repeated conflict and emotional intensity.
Seeing the Whole Picture
One reality of complaints and conflict work is that we rarely see people at their best. We meet them when they are frustrated with a decision, feel ignored, or are worried about their future. In other words, we see a small slice of someone’s life during a difficult time.
It can be tempting to make broad conclusions about who they are based on that limited interaction. I often remind participants in my workshops that the behaviour we observe may be real, but it is not necessarily the whole story.
The person who appears aggressive may be frightened.
The person who seems repetitive may feel unheard.
The person who appears unreasonable may struggle to understand a process that feels confusing and overwhelming.
None of this excuses poor behaviour. It simply reminds us that understanding behaviour and approving of it are not the same.
Boundaries and Empathy
When I discuss empathy and curiosity, some fear I suggest professionals should tolerate unacceptable conduct. That is not my position. I have written extensively about the importance of self-care for complaints professionals, which starts with ensuring we do not become punching bags for others in distress.
One of the strongest messages in my de-escalation training is the importance of clear boundaries:
Professionals should not be expected to tolerate abuse.
They should not absorb personal attacks.
They should not become counsellors or punching bags.
Healthy boundaries are essential for both staff wellbeing and effective complaint management. So too are curiosity and compassion. Boundaries are one of the strongest protective factors against compassion fatigue and burnout in conflict-facing roles.
The key distinction is that boundaries should focus on specific behaviours rather than the identity or diagnosis of the person behind them. For example, we can say:
“I want to help you resolve this matter; however, I cannot continue the conversation if you continue to swear at staff.”
This statement focuses on behaviour, identifies a boundary, explains the consequence, and communicates a willingness to assist. It does not define the individual by their worst behaviour.
Preserving the Possibility of Change
When we focus on behaviour, we preserve the possibility of change. When we focus on identity, we often create a self-fulfilling prophecy. Effective de-escalation training teaches staff to separate behaviour from identity while maintaining clear professional boundaries. It does not train staff to diagnose the type of person they are dealing with.
Safety, Inclusion, and Fairness
In my practice, I frequently return to three principles: safety, inclusion, and fairness. These principles serve as a useful filter when responding to challenging behaviour.
Safety asks whether our approach protects the wellbeing of everyone involved, including staff.
Inclusion asks whether we continue to recognise the humanity and dignity of the person in front of us.
Fairness asks whether our decisions remain grounded in evidence, policy, and procedural fairness rather than assumptions and stereotypes.
I have found these principles particularly valuable when emotions run high. They help us avoid becoming reactive, encourage us to focus on our role's purpose, and remind us that our responsibility is to manage behaviour, resolve issues where possible, and ensure fair processes.
The Politics of Grievance and Fear
There is a broader lesson here. Across the world, grievance and fear have become powerful political tools. When people are overwhelmed or uncertain, there is comfort in simple explanations. There is comfort in being told who is responsible for our problems. This dynamic can also emerge in organisations.
When teams deal with difficult complaints or persistent conflict, it can be tempting to develop narratives about those creating difficulties. While these narratives may validate our experiences, they can also narrow our thinking. The more we view people through the lens of grievance and fear, the less able we become to identify opportunities for understanding and resolution. This does not make our work easier; it simply makes it less effective.
Curiosity: The Key De-escalation Skill
After more than a decade working as a mediator, conciliator, decision-maker, and trainer, I am convinced that curiosity remains one of the most important professional skills in conflict resolution.
Curiosity does not mean agreeing.
Curiosity does not mean abandoning boundaries.
Curiosity does not mean tolerating harmful behaviour.
Instead, it means resisting the urge to reach conclusions too quickly. It means continuing to ask what might be driving the behaviour. It means recognising that people are often more complicated than the labels we attach to them. The goal of complaints handling, conciliation, and dispute resolution is not to prove that someone is difficult. The goal is to understand enough about the situation to move it forward safely, fairly, and constructively.
The longer I work in this field, the more I believe that grievance and fear are poor foundations for good decision-making. They may offer certainty and temporary comfort, but across complaints handling, conciliation, mediation, and workplace conflict resolution, curiosity, fairness, and clear boundaries remain the most powerful tools available to practitioners working in conflict every day.
Motivational interviewing offers another practical framework for maintaining curiosity while supporting accountability and behaviour change.
Learn Practical Strategies for Managing Challenging and Unreasonable Interactions
If your team regularly deals with emotionally heightened behaviour, persistent complaints, or difficult conversations, our Managing Challenging and Unreasonable Interactions workshop provides practical tools to help staff respond with confidence.
Participants learn how to de-escalate conflict, set effective boundaries, manage unreasonable conduct, maintain procedural fairness, and protect their wellbeing while providing high-quality service. The workshop is available as both an in-house program and a public course, designed for complaints teams, dispute resolution practitioners, HR professionals, managers, regulators, ombudsman schemes, and frontline service staff.
Managing challenging behaviour is not about becoming tougher; it is about becoming more skilled.
.png)