The Silent Cost Of Ignoring Conflict In The Age Of AI

A few months ago, I sat with Simone, who was visibly tired. Her company was navigating disruption on all fronts: restructuring, rapid adoptions and mounting pressures to deliver results faster. But what kept this CEO up at night was not the market but the internal conflict between two key executives.

To make things worse, the tension wasn’t coming from underperformers. It was coming from her best performer. His results are unmatched, but his aggression was impacting team morale. People complained about the constant calls and meetings, yet the CEO and COO kept looking away. “We need him,” Simone admitted. But what the team hears is different: His behavior is acceptable. He is protected.

This is the paradox many executives face. In an era defined by disruption and the rise of AI, people seek trust, resilience and human connection. And when executives ignore conflict, they unintentionally promote it, undermining the very culture they want to create.

I have seen two patterns repeat across organizations:

• Escalated Aggression: Stress, uncertainty and the rapid integration of AI have made people more defensive and less patient.

• Executive Avoidance: Hesitation to address conflict when the aggressor is a top performer or the hardest to replace.

What begins as one person’s behavior may quietly reshape collaboration across teams. SHRM reports that U.S. workers endure 201 million acts of incivility every day, costing businesses $1.2 billion daily in lost productivity.

Often, your worst competition is internal, not external.

Whenever we’re called to facilitate an off-site retreat, it is striking how quickly the division at the top is reflected in the way their teams operate. We observe it in guarded conversations and in the way people avoid eye contact across the table. Ongoing conflict is rarely contained in the conference room. It ripples through corporate walls in both subtle and obvious ways.

Unresolved conflict often shows up in results, collaboration and engagement. Teams distracted by tension lose focus on strategy and execution. People stop sharing ideas freely and start protecting themselves. The trust factor drops when employees feel that their leaders tolerate aggression against them.

The human side of leadership has never been more critical in the age of AI.

With AI now embedded into major decision making, customer service and daily operations, the workplace is being redefined. While AI promises efficiency, it also magnifies the pressure to perform at a faster pace, which can easily breed frustration and conflict. AI can also bring about fear, with some employees worrying about being replaced or overlooked. This insecurity can show up as defensiveness or disconnection. With AI integration, leaders must be more intentional about communicating, building empathy and nurturing respect.

Fear amplifies aggression, and unchecked aggression can poison the leadership team. If the risk is high, why do capable leaders avoid conflict? In my work, three reasons surface:

• Fear Of Losing Top Talent: When the aggressor is a high performer, we often rationalize the behavior as a trade-off.

• Discomfort With Confrontation: Many executives excel in strategy and vision but struggle with the discomfort of direct conflict.

• Hope In Conventional Wisdom: Leaders hope that time will ease the tension. In reality, conflict compounds with time.

What we ignore gets promoted.

And when we ignore toxic relationships, the consequences fester over time. Employees lose confidence in leadership when toxic behavior goes unchecked. Aggression becomes normalized, shaping what people see as “how things work here.” People you most want to keep—the steady, collaborative and values-driven employees—are often the first to leave when they don’t feel safe. Customers, partners and future recruits eventually sense the effects of a culture where incivility is tolerated.

My friend Lisa applied for a Global SVP of Sales position. After a full day of panel interviews, one of the VPs on the panel called her and advised her not to take the position. She felt obliged to share how abrasive the leader was. She shared story after story of fear and retaliation. Lisa was deeply grateful to the caller and declined the position even when she was offered a very generous incentive to join.

Never underestimate the power of silence. This challenge is not a people issue. It is a business risk. In the age of AI, highly capable teams may be a solid differentiator of innovation. And the danger in conflict is avoidance.

I worked with Simone to acknowledge her fears and to list the top gains and risks associated with her top performer. We defined what is working and what continues to be a challenge. With the premise of “we challenge ideas, not people,” Simone agreed that a performance-driven intervention was necessary. Here's how the situation was navigated:

1. Model courage with top performers.

The toughest conversations are often with your highest achievers. Courage is a differentiator. Simon’s message became clear: “Your results are strong, but the way you achieve them is undermining the culture and my position. For the results to matter, this specific behavior must change.”

2. Make peace with what you tolerate.

Managers take their cues from what their leaders tolerate. When you interrupt conflict, it sends a strong signal about standards. Be clear with what you tolerate and make it clear to others where you draw the line.

Empathy, trust and safe dialogue can amplify human potential. Conflict fuels innovation when handled with respect and curiosity. Our actions not only promote what is right, they invite authentic conversations to the table—a much-needed skill in times of change.

Every act of silence sends a message.

When you make space for a healthy conversation, you shift the energy to more productive ways of working. Silence is a decision. Response is a decision. Both shape your culture. The question is: What do you choose to promote?

This article was published on Forbes.com.