When Conflict Starts to Escalate
From Win–Win to Lose–Lose and back: How the Outer Judge intensifies conflict and the Inner Master helps us resolve it.
Conflicts arise whenever needs, interests, expectations or values differ. They are not necessarily harmful: disagreement can promote understanding, negotiation and change. Escalation starts when solving the problem becomes less important than proving who is right or defeating the other side.
Friedrich Glasl describes nine escalating levels, grouped into Win–Win, Win–Lose and Lose–Lose. Research supports distinguishing patterns of escalation, but does not show that every conflict inevitably progresses through all nine stages.
Competitive and cooperative relationships
In competitive relationships, such as commercial negotiations, protecting one’s interests and making a profit take priority; there is no necessary obligation to prioritize the other party’s emotional well-being. Yet understanding their constraints helps reach workable agreements.
In cooperative relationships, such as a couple, each partner’s well-being is itself part of the shared goal. Sharing feelings, vulnerability and the fear of losing closeness can matter as much as the practical agreement. Business partnerships may also contain trust, and romantic relationships may involve genuinely incompatible interests.
In Bodymind Therapy, the Outer Judge evaluates the other person’s behavior through our moral values: “Who is right? How should they behave?”
The Inner Master uses meta-awareness and cognitive flexibility: “What is happening? What is necessary? What can I influence, and which action is functional?” Its perspective is amoral, not immoral: it suspends moral condemnation to understand other value systems without surrendering rights or personal boundaries.
Our two examples run through all eighteen steps.
Business: a supplier increases the price of a crucial component by 20%; the buyer cannot absorb it without risking a production shutdown, while the supplier must protect its margin.
Couple: on their only holiday together that year, one partner wants time alone at the seaside, while the other wants to visit elderly parents in the mountains.
Part I — Escalation: +1 to +9
Phase 1 — Win–Win: from disagreement to competition
+1. Hardening of positions
Different wishes become rigid demands.
Business: “We cannot accept 20% more.” — “We cannot supply at the old price.”
Couple: “I want the seaside.” — “I must visit my parents.”
Outer Judge: “My position is the reasonable one.”
Inner Master: “What need lies behind each position?”
Trap: treating a preference as an objective necessity.
Prevent +2: investigate costs, constraints and emotional needs before defending the proposed solution.
+2. Debate and polarization
Parties try to prove their position superior.
Business: “A responsible supplier would never raise prices this way.”
Couple: “You cannot sacrifice our only holiday for your family.”
Outer Judge: “My values are right.”
Inner Master: “Which criteria and interests differ?”
Trap: turning disagreement into moral competition.
Prevent +3: distinguish facts, interpretations and values and actively seek information that could challenge your assumptions.
+3. Actions instead of words
Unilateral decisions replace dialogue.
Business: the supplier stops deliveries; the buyer discreetly searches for alternatives.
Couple: a partner books without agreement.
Outer Judge: “If they refuse to understand, I can act alone.”
Inner Master: “Will this increase distrust?”
Trap: trying to force agreement through action.
Prevent +4: agree on a decision process, deadlines and a conversation to consider alternatives.
Phase 2 — Win–Lose: from competition to hostility
+4. Images and coalitions
Each side builds a negative image of the other and recruits allies.
Business: the buyer publicly calls the supplier opportunistic.
Couple: both ask friends to confirm that the other is selfish.
Outer Judge: “Everyone agrees with me.”
Inner Master: “Am I seeking information or confirmation?”
Trap: turning support into a coalition.
Prevent +5: seek impartial perspectives rather than people who reinforce hostility.
+5. Loss of face and humiliation
Behavior is treated as proof of defective character.
Business: “Your company is run by incompetent people.”
Couple: “You cannot be a good partner.”
Outer Judge: “The person is the problem.”
Inner Master: “Which specific behavior needs addressing?”
Trap: attacking identity.
Prevent +6: describe observable conduct and its impact; in relationships, vulnerability is often more productive than humiliation.
+6. Threat strategies
Fear becomes a negotiating tool.
Business: “Reverse the increase or we will sue and end the contract.”
Couple: “Choose the mountains and we’re finished.”
Outer Judge: “Being right entitles me to force change.”
Inner Master: “What boundary can I set without controlling them?”
Trap: confusing boundaries with threats.
Prevent +7: state concrete limits, alternatives and consequences without intimidation; use mediation if needed.
Phase 3 — Lose–Lose: from hostility to destruction
+7. Limited destructive blows
Hurting the other outweighs one’s own losses.
Business: the buyer stops orders as punishment despite halting production.
Couple: a partner cancels a non-refundable booking out of revenge.
Outer Judge: “They deserve to pay.”
Inner Master: “Am I protecting myself or seeking revenge?”
Trap: treating their suffering as victory.
Prevent +8: stop retaliation and calculate the real costs to all parties.
+8. Fragmentation
Attacks target the other’s relationships and resources.
Business: both companies undermine each other’s commercial partners.
Couple: relatives and friends are enlisted to isolate and discredit the other.
Outer Judge: “They deserve to lose everyone’s trust.”
Inner Master: “Destroying them will not repair my loss.”
Trap: confusing destruction with justice.
Prevent +9: stop retaliation and seek independent protection or mediation.
+9. Together into the abyss
Defeating the other matters more than survival or well-being.
Business: an expensive dispute continues despite shutdown and mounting losses.
Couple: both keep hurting each other after the holiday and trust have been lost.
Outer Judge: “I’d rather lose everything than let them win.”
Inner Master: “I must stop the damage.”
Trap: equating dignity with their defeat.
Next step: prioritize safety, end harmful actions and seek external support; reconciliation is not the immediate goal.
Part II — De-escalation: −9 to −1
De-escalation is not simply Glasl’s staircase in reverse. Following destructive conflict, safety, regulation, recognition, responsibility and cooperation often have to be rebuilt.
The nine negative levels below are a practical Bodymind Therapy framework, not an independently validated prediction scale.
Phase 1 — Lose–Lose: stopping destruction
−9. Interruption
Interrupt attacks and retaliation.
Business: “We are both losing; let’s suspend hostile actions and mediate.”
Couple: “We keep hurting one another; I want to pause.”
Outer Judge: “First they must admit fault.”
Inner Master: “I can stop harm without establishing guilt.”
Facilitate −8: agree exactly what behavior stops and respect that agreement.
−8. Safety
A dialogue requires predictable conditions, not instant trust.
Business: formal channels and temporary agreements are established.
Couple: “Can we talk without insults or threats?”
Outer Judge: “They deserve no guarantees.”
Inner Master: “What protects everyone from further harm?”
Facilitate −7: define observable boundaries and check whether behavior follows them.
−7. Self-regulation
Intense emotion may narrow thinking and trigger impulses.
Business: “I am angry; I’ll review the numbers before deciding.”
Couple: “I need time to listen properly.”
Outer Judge: “My anger proves I am right.”
Inner Master: “Anger tells me about my state, not the other’s intent.”
Facilitate −6: notice bodily signals, regulate activation and return when dialogue becomes possible.
Phase 2 — Beyond Win–Lose: restoring understanding
−6. Recognition
Separate events from interpretations.
Business: “You raised prices by 20%; we interpreted it as exploitation.”
Couple: “I interpreted the mountain plan as saying our time did not matter.”
Outer Judge: “I know their motives.”
Inner Master: “What can I verify?”
Facilitate −5: treat intention-attributions as hypotheses and ask for missing information.
−5. Responsibility
Recognize one’s part without excusing it through the other’s behavior.
Business: “Your price harmed us, but our public accusations worsened the dispute.”
Couple: “I felt neglected, but threatening separation was destructive.”
Outer Judge: “They started it.”
Inner Master: “What was under my control?”
Facilitate −4: accept one’s own responsibility without demanding equal blame.
−4. Mutual understanding
Recognize competing value systems without agreeing with them.
Business: “We see your increased costs; please recognize our risk of shutdown.”
Couple: “For me this is our time together; for you it is a rare visit with elderly parents.”
Outer Judge: “My values should win.”
Inner Master: “Which needs matter to both?”
Facilitate −3: restate the other’s perspective, checking that it was understood; include emotions where the relationship itself matters.
Phase 3 — Win–Win: repair and cooperation
−3. Repair
Acknowledge consequences and take concrete action.
Business: correct inaccurate accusations and negotiate losses.
Couple: “I am sorry you felt unimportant; I want to rebuild trust through actions.”
Outer Judge: “They must repair everything first.”
Inner Master: “What can I repair or reasonably request?”
Facilitate −2: agree on observable actions, without demanding immediate forgiveness.
−2. Cooperation
Generate solutions addressing underlying interests.
Business: a phased price increase, guaranteed volumes and a longer contract.
Couple: a few days visiting the parents followed by time at the sea.
Outer Judge: “Fairness must prove who was right.”
Inner Master: “What best meets our real needs?”
Facilitate −1: compare options rather than assuming a fifty-fifty compromise is optimal.
−1. Functional Win–Win
A workable agreement respects legitimate interests.
Business: the supplier preserves a sustainable margin while the customer prevents shutdown.
Couple: time together is protected while the family visit is accommodated.
Outer Judge: “Who won?”
Inner Master: “Is this sustainable, and what have we learned?”
Maintain Win–Win: review agreements and address early signs of rigidity.
The Role of Bodymind Therapy: Training the Inner Master
Understanding conflict is only a beginning. Knowing that we should listen, remain calm or adopt another perspective does not mean we can do so when we feel criticized, threatened or overwhelmed.
Under stress, familiar archetypal states may reappear:
The Outer Judge condemns others, the Inner Judge condemns ourselves, while other patterns lead us to withdraw, appease, attack or try to control the uncontrollable.
The Inner Master describes the capacity to notice these reactions without automatically identifying with them, regulate activation and choose what is necessary and functional.
Time-out and de-escalation skills
A first trainable skill is noticing when activation interferes with constructive dialogue. Tense muscles, altered breathing, repetitive thoughts or impulses to interrupt may signal that a pause is useful.
A time-out means communicating the need for a break, agreeing to return and using the interval to self-regulate; it is not punishment through silence or indefinite avoidance.
De-escalation skills involve noticing accusation, sarcasm, humiliation and negative reciprocity, then practicing replies that acknowledge the other’s experience without surrendering legitimate boundaries.
These alternatives become accessible through repeated rehearsal in everyday disagreements, not through insight alone.
Perspective-taking and cognitive flexibility
Perspective-taking allows us to understand another’s constraints, feelings and values without agreeing. In business, learning why a supplier needs more revenue may reveal contract alternatives; in a couple, understanding the importance of elderly parents makes space for the equally real fear of losing precious time together.
Cognitive flexibility involves generating alternative interpretations, checking evidence, tolerating uncertainty and separating a problem to be solved from a reality to be accepted. Instead of asking whether the other is selfish, we ask which needs are in conflict and what is actually within our influence.
From the Outer Judge to the Inner Master
The archetypes are not fixed personality types or diagnoses. Someone may negotiate flexibly at work but judge harshly at home.
In Bodymind body psychotherapy we train awareness of bodily activation, emotion, interpretation and impulse; use regulation exercises, role-play and behavioral rehearsal; and review real conflicts between sessions.
After an argument we may ask when tension rose, when an interpretation became a moral verdict and what a time-out or a different response might have changed. Even self-criticism can be observed rather than obeyed. The goal is not to remain permanently in an ideal state, but to recognize when we leave it and return more deliberately.
Conclusion — The Inner Master Does Not Need to Win
Glasl’s escalation levels help recognize when disagreement becomes competition, hostility and destruction, while the complementary de-escalation framework helps organize interruption, safety, recognition, repair and cooperation.
These stages are useful for orientation, but change depends on practiced skills rather than theoretical understanding alone. Not every conflict ends in reconciliation: sometimes changing suppliers, setting a boundary, accepting disagreement or ending a relationship is more functional than forcing agreement.
The Outer Judge wants to establish who is right; the Inner Master wants to understand what is happening, what is necessary and what to do next. That transition is not automatic: it can be trained.
Scientific references
Glasl, F. (1982). The Process of Conflict Escalation and Roles of Third Parties.
Scheppa-Lahyani, M. N., & Zapf, D. (2023). Development and validation of the Conflict Escalation Questionnaire. Frontiers in Psychology. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1164990
Galinsky, A. D., et al. (2008). Why it pays to get inside the head of your opponent. Psychological Science. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02096.x
Laurenceau, J.-P., et al. (1998). Intimacy as an interpersonal process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.74.5.1238
Eubanks, C. F., et al. (2018). Alliance rupture repair: A meta-analysis. Psychotherapy. doi:10.1037/pst0000185
Blanchard, V. L., et al. (2009). Effects of relationship education on couples’ communication skills. Journal of Family Psychology. doi:10.1037/a0015211
Scientific note:
The nine positive levels follow Glasl; the nine negative steps and the archetypes are practice-oriented Bodymind Therapy concepts, not independently validated clinical scales. Evidence supports relevant psychological processes, not a universal eighteen-step prediction model.
