Seeking to resolve conflicts quickly often falls short. Frank Baumann-Habersack explains how leaders can use conflicts to redefine their authority and reshape relationships within their teams.
Leaders are expected to make decisions, set boundaries, and represent the company’s interests—while simultaneously listening, fostering participation, and building relationships based on equality. In the heat of a conflict, these expectations often collide.
Faced with this, many leaders fall back on familiar patterns: they assert their will, give in, or attempt to bring the conflict to a swift end. Frank Baumann-Habersack argues that all three approaches are inadequate.
In his book *Transformative Authority* (*Transformative Autorität*), he suggests that conflicts should not be viewed as disruptions that leaders must eliminate. Instead, he sees them as opportunities to fundamentally transform leadership relationships. In this framework, authority does not stem solely from a formal position; rather, it grows within relationships—through attribution, recognition, and the behavior of those involved. This leads Baumann-Habersack to pose an uncomfortable question: How is a leader’s authority manifested when they do not rely on coercion?
Strength without dominance
Transformative Authority builds upon the concept of “New Authority,” developed by Haim Omer and Arist von Schlippe. Its core idea is that strength need not be rooted in power. Individuals can act with persistence, maintain boundaries, and assume responsibility without threatening or humiliating others.
Baumann-Habersack applies this concept to leadership relationships within organizations and further develops it. His model comprises seven elements:
- Presence means that leaders remain accessible and visible within their relationships.
- Self-leadership requires managing one’s own thoughts, feelings, and reactions, rather than acting impulsively.
- Persistence and de-escalation involve setting boundaries while avoiding any escalation.
- Making amends and restoring social balance require not only acknowledging mistakes and harm but also taking steps to correct them.
- Reflection involves examining one’s own contribution to a conflict.
- Transparency is intended to make decisions understandable and traceable.
- Leadership coalitions and networks ensure that leaders do not have to face difficult conflicts on their own.
What does transformative authority mean?
Transformative authority refers to a form of leadership in which authority does not derive solely from one’s position, hierarchy, or power to enforce compliance. Instead, it emerges through presence, self-leadership, persistence, transparency, and a respectful approach to conflict. Leaders remain capable of making decisions and setting boundaries, while eschewing threats, humiliation, or the assertion of personal superiority. The goal is a leadership relationship that integrates responsibility, equality, and non-violence.
These elements do not constitute a checklist. Baumann-Habersack views them as an expression of a particular mindset. Her goal: a leadership relationship that combines non-violence, equal worth, and shared responsibility. This does not mean abolishing organizational hierarchies. A leader remains responsible for decisions, but should not mistake their position for personal superiority.
A conflict is more than just a point of contention.
The book’s most compelling idea lies in its understanding of conflict. While conventional approaches often ask how a dispute can be resolved, Baumann-Habersack additionally asks what the conflict reveals about leadership relationships and the order that governs them.
Conflicts encompass unspoken expectations, past hurts, dependencies, and conflicting interests. Simply bringing a conflict to an end removes the immediate trigger, but leaves the underlying relationship unchanged.
Transformative conflict resolution requires leaders to look beyond the behavior of their employees. They must also examine their own contributions to the conflict, their decision-making, and their underlying assumptions about authority.
How can conflicts alter leadership relationships?
Conflicts reveal not only differing interests but also unspoken expectations, dependencies, past hurts, and problematic power dynamics. If only the specific points of contention are addressed, the underlying leadership relationship may remain unchanged. Transformative conflict resolution, therefore, also examines the role of the leader—their decisions and their conception of authority. In this way, the conflict becomes an opportunity to renegotiate relationships, roles, and shared responsibility.
Transformation cannot be scheduled with clockwork precision
From this, the author develops a transformation process comprising six areas: ranging from a disorienting dilemma—and the regulation of emotions such as fear, anger, guilt, or shame—to the formation of a shared intention, the examination of one’s own assumptions, and the testing of new leadership practices.
The process does not follow a linear path. Leaders and employees move through these areas at different paces; they may revisit previous stages or work on specific aspects multiple times. It is precisely this lack of synchronization that can give rise to new conflicts.
This highlights the economic tension inherent in the approach. Baumann-Habersack himself notes that non-linear processes of change can collide with the principles of efficiency, linearity, and controllability.
Companies need decisions
His model requires time for reflection, affect regulation, dialogue, and reparation. However, companies cannot postpone decisions indefinitely. Delaying action may help calm a conflict and prevent rash reactions; yet, it can also be perceived as a lack of leadership or may even exacerbate the escalation.
Even a leadership coalition is not a guaranteed solution. In the empirical section of the book, Baumann-Habersack analyzes a non-representative online survey consisting of 378 fully completed questionnaires. In their open-ended responses, some participants offer a warning: involving other leaders can exacerbate existing power imbalances. Support may turn into an attempt to exert influence, and colleagues might find themselves in a position where they are forced to take sides.
Transparency is similarly ambivalent. While it can foster trust, leaders cannot disclose all information; confidentiality imposes limits. Furthermore, revealing one’s motives, concerns, and desires can come across as manipulative. Consequently, absolute transparency does not necessarily lead to greater trust.
Setting boundaries remains a leadership task
De-escalation, too, is not suitable for every situation. Feedback from the survey highlights that conflicts unfold in different ways; some require time, while others demand swift action. Sexual assault, violence, or bullying should never be romanticized as opportunities for growth. In such cases, companies must set clear boundaries. Transformative authority does not absolve leaders from the responsibility of making decisions; rather, it raises the standards for how those decisions are justified and implemented.
The book is based on Baumann-Habersack’s dissertation. The author integrates systems-theoretical and field-theoretical approaches with the theory of transformative learning and Otto Scharmer’s Theory U. This results in a distinct model that consistently conceptualizes authority, conflict, and transformation in relation to one another. The empirical component includes two systemic exploratory constellations and twelve co-researchers.
A well-founded model, but not yet proof of effectiveness
Participants rated most features of the transformative conflict style as fairly or very useful. Receiving particularly high levels of approval were the collaborative search for solutions, reflection on one’s own contribution to a conflict, the inclusion of employees’ interests, and the active maintenance of the relationship.
However, this does not prove that the approach actually resolves conflicts more effectively or makes organizations more successful. The survey captures perceived utility, not the impact within actual companies. The sample is self-selected, and the responses may be influenced by social desirability bias. None of the hypotheses derived from the initial exploratory framework reached, on average, the designated threshold of being “quite useful.”
Baumann-Habersack himself identifies these limitations. His study does not provide classical evidence; rather, it develops and explores a model that requires further research and practical testing.
Where do the limits of transformative authority lie?
Transformative authority is not a one-size-fits-all approach suitable for every conflict situation. In cases involving violence, sexual assault, or bullying, companies must act immediately and establish clear boundaries. Furthermore, practices such as fostering transparency, de-escalation, and forming leadership coalitions can sometimes lead to unintended negative consequences, such as increased pressure or a widening power imbalance. Additionally, the effectiveness of this model has not yet been substantiated by representative empirical studies. Consequently, while the approach provides a sound framework for thinking and action, it does not offer a guaranteed formula for successful conflict resolution.
Authority reveals itself in how one deals with opposition.
“Transformative Authority” is, therefore, not a handbook for quick conflict resolution. The book demands a great deal from its readers. It integrates numerous theories, employs sophisticated terminology, and offers no simple formulas.
Its strength lies elsewhere: it liberates authority from the false dichotomy between imposing one’s will and giving in. Leaders can maintain boundaries without resorting to humiliation. They can take responsibility without feigning infallibility. And they can address conflicts without feeling the need to eliminate every bit of tension immediately.
Whether this always succeeds within companies remains an open question. However, the book sharpens one’s perspective on a crucial distinction: formal power indicates who is authorized to make decisions, while authority is revealed by how an individual wields that power.
About the Author
Editor-in-chief Sabine Hockling is the founder of *WIR SIND DER WANDEL* (“We Are the Change”). A business journalist and *SPIEGEL* bestselling author, she has spent over 20 years exploring the transformations shaping our world of work. As an author, editor, and ghostwriter, she regularly publishes non-fiction books—since 2023, under the imprint *DIE RATGEBER VERLAG*, which she established herself.
Source: wirsindderwandel.de
