Conflict is an inevitable feature of every organisation because individuals and groups differ in their goals, values, perceptions, interests, personalities, and access to resources. Organisational Theory and Design recognises that conflict is neither inherently good nor bad. Its impact depends on the intensity, nature, and management of the disagreement. While the traditional view regarded conflict as harmful and something to be eliminated, the modern interactionist view argues that a certain level of conflict is essential for innovation, creativity, adaptability, and organisational effectiveness. The statement that moderate organisational conflict can be constructive and stimulate growth, whereas extreme conflict is dysfunctional, is best explained through the Inverted U-shaped relationship between conflict and performance. The Inverted U-shaped relationship demonstrates that organisational performance initially increases with an increase in conflict, reaches an optimal level at moderate conflict, and then declines as conflict becomes excessive. The relationship resembles an inverted letter "U," indicating that both very low and very high levels of conflict are associated with poor organisational performance, whereas moderate conflict produces the highest level of effectiveness. At the first stage, where conflict is very low or absent, organisational performance remains poor. A complete absence of conflict often indicates employee complacency, excessive conformity, lack of innovation, and resistance to change. Employees may simply accept existing practices without questioning inefficient procedures. Decision-making becomes mechanical because individuals avoid expressing different opinions or challenging managerial assumptions. Such organisations fail to respond effectively to environmental changes, technological developments, or customer expectations. Low conflict creates a stagnant organisational climate where creativity and continuous improvement are discouraged. Employees may lack motivation to improve processes, resulting in declining productivity and competitiveness. In such situations, groupthink becomes a significant problem. Members strive for consensus rather than critically evaluating alternatives. Poor decisions may be accepted because nobody wishes to create disagreement. Therefore, organisations experiencing very low conflict often become rigid, bureaucratic, and incapable of adapting to changing market conditions. As conflict increases from low to moderate levels, organisational performance also improves. Moderate conflict encourages employees to exchange ideas, challenge assumptions, and evaluate alternative solutions. Constructive disagreement stimulates critical thinking