It's the Principle! How Values-Based Coaching and the SCARF Framework Transform Workplace Conflict
- Shiv Martin
- 2d
- 7 min read
Workplace Conflict Resolution: How values-based coaching questions (and the SCARF framework) can transform difficult conversations
Uncovering and addressing clashing values is an important part of peacebuilding, whether you’re working with colleagues in a team, community leaders, or parties in a formal dispute resolution process. In cross-cultural settings this can be especially complex, because people may hold very different assumptions about respect, hierarchy, communication, time, and accountability. Sometimes, agreement won’t be possible. But respect still is, and it’s often the difference between ongoing escalation and a workable way forward.
When workplace conflict feels wildly out of proportion to the issue on the table, it’s usually because the real issue isn’t the issue.
It’s the principle.
In my work as a mediator and conflict coach, I see this pattern constantly. Two people can be looking at the same facts, hearing the same words, and walking away with completely different stories about what happened and what it meant.
Often, the disagreement is sitting on top of something deeper: values and social needs.
That’s where the emotional charge comes from.
This article shares a practical way to work with that reality, including:
how values clashes tend to show up in workplace conflict
the SCARF framework (David Rock) as a useful lens for emotional reactions
values-based coaching questions you can borrow for your next hard conversation
practical ways to turn insight into action
Why values clashes create workplace conflict
Values are the principles that shape how we make decisions and how we treat people.
They can be influenced by culture, personality, life experience, professional training, and role expectations.
In workplaces, values clashes often show up as:
different ideas about what “good work” looks like
different assumptions about respect and communication style
different tolerance levels for risk, uncertainty, or change
different expectations of autonomy, authority, and accountability
When people prioritise different values, they can feel like the other person is being unreasonable, unsafe, disloyal, disrespectful, careless, controlling, or unfair. That’s when mistrust grows and conversations spiral into defensiveness.
The tricky part is that values aren’t always easy to talk about directly. If someone is already upset, asking “what are your values?” can land as too personal, too abstract, or simply annoying.
That’s where a framework like SCARF can help.
A useful lens: SCARF (David Rock) and why conflict gets emotional fast
One framework I often use to make sense of strong emotional reactions in conflict is SCARF, developed by David Rock. SCARF describes five social needs that our brains tend to treat as “threats or rewards” in everyday interactions.
When one of these needs feels threatened, people can react quickly and intensely, even if the surface issue seems minor. That’s why “small” workplace moments can produce “big” conflict.
SCARF is helpful because a clash of values often shows up as a clash of social needs.
Status
Need: to feel respected, competent, valued. Sounds like: “You undermined me”, “You made me look bad”, “You don’t respect my expertise.” Values clash: direct feedback vs dignity and respect.
Certainty
Need: clarity, predictability, knowing what’s happening. Sounds like: “The goalposts keep moving”, “No one tells me anything”, “This is unclear.” Values clash: flexibility and speed vs structure and process.
Autonomy
Need: choice, agency, control over your work. Sounds like: “I’m being micromanaged”, “I don’t get a say”, “I’m boxed in.” Values clash: accountability and oversight vs independence and trust.
Relatedness
Need: safety with others, inclusion, not being judged or excluded. Sounds like: “It feels personal”, “I’m being singled out”, “They don’t like me.” Values clash: task-focus and efficiency vs connection and care.
Fairness
Need: equity, consistency, justice. Sounds like: “That’s not fair”, “Why do they get away with it?”, “The rules aren’t applied equally.” Values clash: discretion and loyalty vs transparency and consistency.
What SCARF explains about emotional reactions
When a SCARF need is threatened, you’ll often see:
defensiveness or anger
shutdown or avoidance
rigid thinking (“this is the only way”)
over-explaining, nitpicking, or escalating language
an obsession with the “principle” of the matter
From a conflict coaching perspective, those reactions aren’t random. They’re signals.
A useful bridging question in these moments is:
“What feels most at stake for you here?”or
“What are you most concerned might happen if this continues?”
That’s often where the real conversation starts.
How to use values-based questions without making it awkward
Values questions work best after you’ve created a bit of safety and rapport.
A simple setup can help:
“Can I ask a bigger-picture question to understand what’s driving this for you?”
“I’m not trying to debate you. I’m trying to understand what matters most.”
Then ask. And genuinely listen.
Values-based coaching questions you can borrow
1) Open-ended questions that reveal what matters
“What matters most to you in this situation?”
“What’s the principle you feel is on the line?”
“What would a good outcome look like for you, beyond the immediate issue?”
“What feels most important to protect here: trust, quality, safety, fairness, reputation, relationships?”
2) Story prompts (often the fastest route to values)
“Tell me about a time you felt most respected at work. What was happening?”
“Tell me about a moment you felt proud of how you handled something difficult. What made you proud?”
“Think of a hard decision you’ve made at work. What guided you?”
3) Reflection questions (legacy, boundaries, non-negotiables)
“What’s non-negotiable for you in how you work with people?”
“What line do you never want to cross, even under pressure?”
“How do you want people to describe you as a colleague or leader?”
4) Hypotheticals (to surface priorities when values collide)
“If you couldn’t get everything you want here, what part would matter most?”
“If we had to choose between speed and quality this month, what would you prioritise and why?”
“If you could change one thing about how the team works together, what would it be?”
5) Clarification prompts that deepen insight (without pressure)
“Say a bit more about that.”
“What makes that so important to you?”
“What do you think I’m missing about your perspective?”
“What would feel fair from your point of view?”
Sometimes the issue isn’t a values clash you can gently explore over a coffee. Sometimes SCARF is fully “lit up”, emotions are high, language gets sharper, and the conversation starts to slide into blame, threat, or shutdown. That’s the moment leaders and HR teams need more than good questions. They need a steady de-escalation framework, clear boundaries, and language that lowers threat fast.
If that’s the kind of conflict you’re dealing with, my half day online training Managing Challenging & Unreasonable Interactions is designed for exactly this. We cover psychology, neuroscience, practical scripts, and how to stay calm and procedurally fair when someone escalates. Register for our March Course Now →
Active listening: the method inside the method
The questions matter, but the listening matters more.
Listen for:
repeated words (respect, standards, safety, control, trust, fairness)
emotional spikes (often a threatened SCARF need)
“non-negotiables” (core boundaries and values)
black-and-white statements (“always”, “never”, “they don’t care”)
Values aren’t always stated as values. They show up as strong reactions.
Turning insight into action
Once values and SCARF needs are named, you can move from heat to practical problem-solving.
Here are four steps I use with clients:
Name what you’re hearing “It sounds like fairness and consistency are really important to you here.” “It sounds like you’re feeling undermined (status), and that’s landed hard.”
Test for shared drivers “Do you both care about quality, just in different ways?” “Are you both trying to protect the team, but with different approaches?”
Design options that protect what matters “What would protect quality and reduce delays?” “What would help you feel informed (certainty) without slowing everything down?”
Agree on a communication plan “How will you raise issues early next time?” “What do you each need to feel respected in a hard conversation?”
Ready to apply this in your next difficult conversation? Download my free DIY Mediation Guide for Workplace Conflict.
It includes structured conversation frameworks, agenda templates, and practical de-escalation tools for leaders and HR professionals.👉 Download your free copy here.
The cross-cultural perspective
In cross-cultural conflict, shared values can be harder to identify, not because people don’t care about the same broad principles, but because those principles can be expressed in very different ways. Respect might look like directness in one context and restraint in another. Fairness might mean consistency for one person and flexibility for another, depending on history, hierarchy, and lived experience. In these moments, the goal isn’t always to “find the common value” and move on. Sometimes the most realistic outcome is a respectful way to work together despite difference. Curiosity and openness to another person’s worldview is a strong starting point: asking how they see the situation, what matters to them, and what a respectful outcome would look like from their perspective.
The goal isn’t perfect harmony. It’s workable agreements that respect what matters and reduce repeat conflict.
Want to build this skill in your leaders and HR team?
If you’d like support navigating difficult conversations at work, I deliver practical coaching and training for leaders and HR teams across Australia. We focus on steady communication under pressure, values-based problem-solving, and evidence-informed de-escalation tools.
Need support soon? Book a free 30-minute consult or reach out directly: contact@shivmartin.com 0433 904 303
Hi, I’m Shiv Martin. I’m a nationally accredited mediator, lawyer, conciliator, and conflict management specialist with over a decade of experience working across government, business, and community settings. I support teams to navigate complex and emotionally charged situations through mediation and conciliation, conflict skills training, facilitation, and practical advice on policies and processes. My approach is grounded in law, psychology, and real-world dispute resolution, with a strong focus on clarity, fairness, and workable outcomes.
If you’d like to talk about how I can help you or your organisation, you can get in touch here: 👉 Contact us
Comments