Purpose The purpose of this paper is to develop the Conflict-Ready Manager Framework as an integrated explanation of how managers move from complex conflict toward constructive action. The framework conceptualizes conflict readiness as a higher-order, developable managerial capability. Design/methodology/approach A theory-informed conceptual approach integrates research on conflict, cognitive load, sensemaking, ethical decision-making and conflict capability. Sources addressed three analytic questions; concepts were compared for overlap and distinction, then organized into a developmental framework and four propositions. Findings The framework explains how cognitive regulation, contextual and ethical interpretation and adaptive action are coordinated within conflict readiness. Cognitive load management helps preserve leadership discernment under pressure; leadership discernment determines what response a situation warrants; and conflict capability enables managers to select, adapt and enact that response. It distinguishes dynamic response within conflict episodes from longer-term capability development. Research limitations/implications As a conceptual paper, the study develops rather than empirically tests the framework. Future research can develop measures, test the propositions across contexts, examine boundary conditions and evaluate targeted development. Practical implications The framework helps practicing managers and leadership-development professionals identify response breakdowns and target development. Time-bounded workshops support development, while management educators may use it for applied learning. Originality/value This paper conceptualizes conflict readiness as a higher-order, developable, integrative managerial capability coordinating cognitive load management, leadership discernment and conflict capability rather than as a conflict style or isolated technique.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sam Koudsia (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: