Understand the hidden thought patterns that shape your reactions and how restorative practices can break the cycle for better collaboration.
Research shows that managers waste valuable time spending up to four hours each week managing conflict. Conflict is inevitable, but relationships are a choice. Taking a moment to understand why we react to what we perceive can help us manage our responses in a way that builds stronger relationships, rather than furthering harm or increasing tensions. This can not only save valuable time but also proactively strengthen morale and improve workplace culture. One tool that helps us to reflect and explore this intrapersonal relationship is the Ladder of Inference.
Climbing the Ladder
The Ladder of Inference is a mental model developed by organizational behavioralists Chris Argyris and Donald Schön to help map how people collect information, make decisions, and act on those decisions. Climbing up the ladder happens very quickly because our brains process information efficiently. This causes us to make assumptions and decisions based solely on observable data and through our personal lens. Pausing and using the Restorative Questions can bring us back down each rung of the ladder and closer to better relationships that’re grounded in understanding.
Rung 1: Observable Data and Experiences - This is the relevant, raw information available – business metrics, personal knowledge, institutional knowledge, and personal observations.
Rung 2: Select Data from Observations - Based on perceptions, a select portion of this information is processed. Filtering the information may be influenced by things like confirmation bias, personal opinions, upbringing, or beliefs.
Rung 3: Add Meanings Based on Cultural and Personal Biases - The information is then analyzed and interpreted through this filtered lens, using personal biases to make sense of the event.
Rung 4: Making Assumptions Based on Added Meanings and Drawing Conclusions - Assumptions are made based on this refined view of the information, further analyzing and adding deeper context.
Rung 5: Adopt Beliefs About the World - The information is then applied more broadly to make generalized, sweeping judgments about the world around us, allowing for repeated reinforcement of ideas.
Rung 6: Take Actions Based on Beliefs - This internalized information determines how we enter the world and engage in interpersonal relationships, communities, and systems.
Climbing the ladder creates a reflexive loop wherein personal beliefs continue to influence what data is collected the next time a decision-making scenario is encountered. While this loop is reinforced by neuropathways to maximize efficiency in our brains, it also leads to ineffective decision-making when the assumptions are incorrect.
A Workplace Example
As an example, imagine a scenario where two colleagues have an important meeting coming up for a large project. Colleague A scheduled it weeks in advance to ensure everyone was available, prepared an agenda, and confirmed it with everyone. Colleague B arrives 30 minutes late, appearing disheveled, and without their notes or portion of the agenda materials. This has happened previously, and Colleague A has had conversations with Colleague B to avoid it happening again. Based on the available data, Colleague A concludes that Colleague B doesn’t care about the project, doesn’t respect the work, and doesn’t need to be involved in the future. Making a decision after climbing the Ladder of Inference, Colleague A takes over Colleague B's portion of the agenda without allowing them to derail the meeting and removes them from future project meetings, losing their insights and participation.
Colleague B, in the meantime, is climbing their own ladder. They were up late preparing for the meeting, working around children’s schedules, project deadlines, and immediate home repairs. In Colleague B's rush to arrive at the meeting on time, they were derailed by a sick child they needed to pick up. They were able to quickly find childcare, but the delay caused them to be late. Colleague B was relieved that their portion of the meeting had not been covered when they arrived, but Colleague A spoke over them and didn’t allow them to engage in the meeting. Colleague B now assumes Colleague A doesn’t care about them, about their insights, or about their above-and-beyond efforts to make it to the meeting. This makes future collaboration challenging and slows overall efficiency on future projects.
“Restorative Practices fundamentally change how we interact with others, fostering empathy, mutual accountability, and deeper, more respectful connections even in the midst of conflict.” – Chrystal Haas, Red Clay Unified School District
Pause with Restorative Questions
Before jumping to conclusions that may cause conflict, it’s important to pause, examine assumptions, and remain anchored in connection. Two individuals may perceive the same situation and information very differently depending on their values, beliefs, experiences, and assumptions. Loss of trust and conflict could have been avoided if the colleagues in the scenario above had paused before moving into assumptions.
Restorative practices offer a model for this necessary introspection. For example, a modified version of the Restorative Questions can help guide us back down the ladder.
- What happened? What did I observe?
- What assumptions did I make about these observations?
- Do I have all the information needed to validate these assumptions? Am I missing more data points?
- What else could have influenced this decision?
- How can I make this better?
This practice is one step in recognizing how our own approach to conflict can help us maintain relationships through conflict when it arises. To learn more about this self-reflection exercise and valuable insights for how to navigate conflict, join us for Navigating Conflict: Restorative Practices in the Workplace and create a more collaborative workplace with Restorative Practices at Work: Relational Tools for Culture Change.
References
Lim, T. (2025, February 11). The Ladder Of Inference: A Pathway To Better Collaboration. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/councils/forbescoachescouncil/2025/02/11/the-ladder-of-inference-a-pathway-to-better-collaboration/
Managers spend 4 hours a week on conflict, Myers-Briggs study says. (n.d.). HR Dive. https://www.hrdive.com/news/managers-spend-4-hours-a-week-on-conflict/634796/
