Moore's Conflict Wheel — a comprehensive approach to conflict management

What is Moore's Conflict Wheel?

Christopher Moore, a US mediator, developed the Conflict Wheel as a hands-on analytical tool. The model presents conflict as a wheel divided into five segments, each representing a different source of dispute. That simple visual helps pinpoint what fuels the disagreement and guides the choice of mediation or negotiation techniques. Although Moore designed it for mediators, managers and HR teams also find it useful. Classifying a conflict reduces scattershot responses and focuses effort where it matters. Some conflicts, such as those rooted in values, tend to be more complex and need longer work, while data disputes often require clarifying facts. The Wheel doesn’t mandate a single remedy but suggests paths to explore. Clear diagnosis saves time and helps prevent escalation, while empathy and attention to motivations remain central to the approach.

Five types of conflict

The model distinguishes five main conflict types: interests, data, structural, values and relationships. Interest conflicts arise when parties compete for resources, status or outcomes and focus on positions rather than underlying needs; mediators work to reveal those needs. Data conflicts stem from different interpretations or missing information; resolving them depends on gathering and jointly analyzing evidence. Structural conflicts relate to organizational setup, power distribution and resource allocation; unclear roles or inequitable processes often lie at the root. Value conflicts touch core beliefs and norms and can stall negotiations when positions are tied to identity. Relationship conflicts grow out of communication failures, stereotypes and strong emotions and require rebuilding trust and reframing perceptions. Training for managers should include exercises to spot these types in real cases, because many disputes combine several elements and demand a layered diagnosis.

Effective intervention strategies

Choosing the right strategy depends on the diagnosed conflict type. For interest disputes, shift the conversation from positions to interests and seek integrative solutions that address both parties' needs. In data conflicts, collect missing facts and create a shared interpretation of the evidence; often the problem is how facts are understood, not the facts themselves. Structural conflicts benefit from role changes, resource redistribution or clearer procedures, plus fair decision-making mechanisms that reduce perceived injustice. With value conflicts, identify common ground and agree on working rules that allow collaboration despite differences. Relationship conflicts call for improving communication, clarifying intentions and addressing emotions, often through mediation that lets people speak and be heard. Good practice includes documenting agreements, assigning responsibilities, and setting monitoring steps so transparency reduces suspicion. Training programs and manager support are important: equipping leaders with soft skills prevents many conflicts and helps implement durable solutions.

Holistic approach and AARC

Modern conflict management emphasizes participant dignity and meaningful involvement. AARC frames four practices: acknowledgement, agency, reciprocity and clarity of path. Acknowledgement means accepting each person’s experience and perspective. Agency gives participants an active role in shaping solutions. Reciprocity creates space for fair exchange where both sides give and take. Clarity of path defines next steps and how progress will be monitored. AARC reduces helplessness and restores control, changing how organizations think about repair and restitution. When people see their voice matters, they engage more readily in finding solutions. Leadership should create safe spaces to test ideas, learn from mistakes and provide practical coaching. Training for managers should focus on hands-on exercises and feedback so leaders can lead reparative conversations and build agreements that last. Consistent application of AARC helps organizations avoid long-term tensions and turnover, but it requires committed, transparent leadership.

Practical tips for managers

Begin with a swift diagnosis of the dominant conflict type using simple questions to separate facts from interpretations and to surface motivations. Provide a neutral setting and establish communication rules. Encourage discussion of needs rather than rigid demands. Record agreements, set deadlines and name who is accountable for follow-through. Make sure participants understand what information informed decisions; when data are missing, gather it together and interpret it as a group. In structural cases, consider role adjustments or resource changes. For relationship conflicts, prioritize rebuilding trust and improving dialogue. Model calm, rational decision-making and schedule short follow-up sessions to monitor progress and remove obstacles. Invest in mediation and soft-skill development among leaders and HR. Treat conflict as an opportunity to refine processes and innovate. Capture lessons learned and document good practices so future teams benefit from institutional learning.

Moore's Conflict Wheel provides a clear system for diagnosing the root causes of disputes. Accurate identification of the conflict type is the foundation of effective intervention. Pair practical techniques with respect for participants' dignity, and use AARC to involve people in moving from conflict to repair. Managers trained in these methods strengthen team resilience and creativity. Conflict can be a source of constructive insight if treated as information to be used. Ongoing practice and reflection turn challenges into lasting improvements.

Empatyzer in conflict management practice

Empatyzer supports identifying the conflict type described in Moore's Wheel through quick diagnostics of personalities and participant preferences. The tool gives managers tailored guidance on how to steer a conversation from positions to interests or how to structure a discussion around facts and evidence. In practice, the AI assistant suggests phrasing and question sequences that help surface hidden needs and lower tension. By analyzing team context, Empatyzer can flag likely structural issues and recommend role or procedure changes to consider. It accounts for cognitive and cultural differences, improving communication in relationship conflicts and reducing misunderstandings tied to style. Short micro-lessons train managers in the intervention techniques discussed above, such as working with data or setting collaboration rules when values clash. Empatyzer also helps map the AARC path, proposing responsibilities and deadlines that can serve as checkpoints. Early pilots show teams adopt the tool quickly, easing uptake of the practices without overburdening HR. The result is operational, actionable support for managers running reparative conversations, enabling faster, more focused interventions that reduce escalation risk.