IELTS Speaking: Cách Trả Lời “Describe A Time When You Successfully Managed A Conflict” – Bài Mẫu Band 6-9

Chủ đề “Describe A Time When You Successfully Managed A Conflict” là một trong những topic thường xuyên xuất hiện trong kỳ thi IELTS Speaking, đặc biệt ở Part 2. Theo thống kê từ các đề thi thực tế, chủ đề về xử lý xung đột xuất hiện với tần suất trung bình đến cao trong giai đoạn 2022-2024, và khả năng tiếp tục xuất hiện trong các kỳ thi sắp tới là rất cao.

Chủ đề này quan trọng vì nó đánh giá khả năng kể chuyện, diễn đạt trình tự sự kiện, và đặc biệt là khả năng sử dụng từ vựng liên quan đến cảm xúc, giao tiếp và giải quyết vấn đề – những yếu tố then chốt để đạt band điểm cao.

Trong bài viết này, bạn sẽ học được:

• Câu hỏi thường gặp về chủ đề conflict trong cả 3 Part
• Bài mẫu chi tiết theo từng band điểm 6-7, 7.5-8, và 8.5-9
• Từ vựng và cụm từ ăn điểm giúp bạn tự tin hơn
• Chiến lược trả lời hiệu quả từ góc nhìn của một Examiner
• Những lỗi thường gặp của học viên Việt Nam và cách khắc phục

IELTS Speaking Part 1: Introduction and Interview

Tổng Quan Về Part 1

Part 1 của IELTS Speaking kéo dài khoảng 4-5 phút, trong đó giám khảo sẽ hỏi các câu hỏi ngắn về cuộc sống hàng ngày của bạn. Đây là phần khởi động để bạn làm quen với giám khảo và thi trường.

Chiến lược quan trọng:

• Trả lời tự nhiên, không cần quá dài dòng
• Mở rộng câu trả lời với 2-3 câu (direct answer + reason/example)
• Sử dụng thì động từ chính xác
• Tránh trả lời một từ Yes/No

Lỗi thường gặp của học viên Việt Nam:

• Trả lời quá ngắn gọn, thiếu chi tiết
• Sử dụng từ vựng đơn giản như “good”, “bad”, “nice”
• Không đưa ra ví dụ cụ thể từ kinh nghiệm cá nhân
• Nói quá nhanh do lo lắng

Các Câu Hỏi Thường Gặp

Question 1: Do you often have disagreements with others?

Question 2: How do you usually handle conflicts with friends?

Question 3: Do you think it’s important to resolve conflicts quickly?

Question 4: Are you good at dealing with difficult situations?

Question 5: Have you ever had a disagreement with a colleague or classmate?

Question 6: What kind of conflicts do young people in your country usually have?

Question 7: Do you prefer to solve problems directly or avoid them?

Question 8: Who do you turn to when you have a conflict?

Phân Tích và Gợi Ý Trả Lời Chi Tiết

Question: Do you often have disagreements with others?

🎯 Cách tiếp cận:

• Trả lời trực tiếp có hay không
• Giải thích tần suất và ngữ cảnh
• Đưa ra ví dụ ngắn gọn

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

“Not really. I’m quite an easygoing person, so I don’t have many disagreements with others. Sometimes I have small arguments with my family about household chores, but they’re not serious.”

Phân tích:

• Điểm mạnh: Trả lời trực tiếp câu hỏi, có ví dụ cụ thể về family conflicts
• Hạn chế: Từ vựng còn đơn giản (easygoing, small arguments), thiếu chi tiết về cách xử lý
• Tại sao Band 6-7: Câu trả lời rõ ràng và có cấu trúc, nhưng từ vựng và ý tưởng chưa đủ sophisticated để đạt band cao hơn

📝 Sample Answer – Band 8-9:

“I wouldn’t say I’m conflict-prone, but like anyone else, I occasionally have minor disagreements, particularly with my colleagues when we’re working under tight deadlines. However, I’ve learned to approach these situations diplomatically rather than letting them escalate into full-blown arguments. I find that most conflicts stem from miscommunication rather than genuine differences.”

Phân tích:

• Điểm mạnh: Sử dụng từ vựng tinh tế như “conflict-prone”, “diplomatically”, “escalate”, “miscommunication”; cấu trúc câu phức tạp với mệnh đề quan hệ; thể hiện sự suy nghĩ sâu sắc về nguyên nhân xung đột
• Tại sao Band 8-9: Fluency cao với câu trả lời dài và tự nhiên; Vocabulary range rộng với collocations chính xác; Grammar đa dạng với các cấu trúc phức; Ideas có chiều sâu và nuance

💡 Key Vocabulary & Expressions:

• conflict-prone: có xu hướng dễ xảy ra xung đột
• minor disagreements: những bất đồng nhỏ
• approach situations diplomatically: tiếp cận tình huống một cách khéo léo
• escalate into: leo thang thành
• miscommunication: sự hiểu lầm trong giao tiếp

---

Question: How do you usually handle conflicts with friends?

🎯 Cách tiếp cận:

• Mô tả cách tiếp cận của bạn
• Đưa ra lý do tại sao bạn làm như vậy
• Có thể thêm ví dụ ngắn

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

“When I have a problem with my friends, I try to talk to them directly. I think it’s better to be honest and tell them how I feel. Usually after we talk, we understand each other better and the problem is solved.”

Phân tích:

• Điểm mạnh: Có cấu trúc rõ ràng (approach → reason → result), sử dụng linking words như “usually”
• Hạn chế: Từ vựng cơ bản (talk, problem, tell), thiếu cụm từ idiomatic, câu văn đơn giản
• Tại sao Band 6-7: Truyền đạt ý tốt nhưng thiếu sophistication trong cách diễn đạt

📝 Sample Answer – Band 8-9:

“I’m a firm believer in addressing issues head-on rather than letting them fester. When conflicts arise with friends, I usually suggest we sit down and have a heart-to-heart conversation to clear the air. I’ve found that most misunderstandings can be nipped in the bud if both parties are willing to see things from each other’s perspective. The key is to focus on the issue itself rather than resorting to personal attacks.”

Phân tích:

• Điểm mạnh: Sử dụng nhiều idiomatic expressions tự nhiên (clear the air, nipped in the bud, head-on); cấu trúc ngữ pháp phức tạp với mệnh đề điều kiện; thể hiện sự trưởng thành trong tư duy về giải quyết xung đột
• Tại sao Band 8-9: Fluency tuyệt vời với discourse markers; Vocabulary đa dạng và idiomatic; Grammar structures sophisticated; Pronunciation rõ ràng với word stress chính xác

💡 Key Vocabulary & Expressions:

• address issues head-on: giải quyết vấn đề một cách trực tiếp
• fester: (về vấn đề) âm ỉ, trở nên tồi tệ hơn
• have a heart-to-heart conversation: nói chuyện thật lòng, tâm tình
• clear the air: làm sáng tỏ mọi chuyện
• nip in the bud: ngăn chặn ngay từ đầu
• see things from each other’s perspective: nhìn nhận từ góc độ của nhau

---

Question: Do you think it’s important to resolve conflicts quickly?

🎯 Cách tiếp cận:

• Đưa ra quan điểm rõ ràng
• Giải thích lý do
• Có thể đề cập đến ngoại lệ nếu có

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

“Yes, I think it’s very important. If we don’t solve problems quickly, they can become bigger. Also, if you wait too long, people might forget what the problem was about and it becomes harder to fix.”

Phân tích:

• Điểm mạnh: Có opinion rõ ràng và supporting reasons
• Hạn chế: Reasoning còn đơn giản, thiếu nuance hoặc xem xét nhiều góc độ
• Tại sao Band 6-7: Adequate communication nhưng chưa đủ sophisticated

📝 Sample Answer – Band 8-9:

“Absolutely, though I’d say it depends on the nature of the conflict. Time-sensitive issues definitely need immediate attention to prevent them from snowballing into larger problems. However, I also believe there’s value in taking a step back when emotions are running high. Sometimes a cooling-off period allows both parties to approach the situation more rationally. The key is finding the right balance between acting promptly and giving people space to process their feelings.”

Phân tích:

• Điểm mạnh: Thể hiện critical thinking với việc xem xét nhiều góc độ; sử dụng từ vựng chính xác và sophisticated; cấu trúc câu phức tạp với mệnh đề thời gian và điều kiện
• Tại sao Band 8-9: Shows complexity of thought; natural use of advanced vocabulary; demonstrates ability to discuss abstract concepts; balanced perspective với “however” và “though”

💡 Key Vocabulary & Expressions:

• time-sensitive issues: các vấn đề cấp bách
• immediate attention: sự chú ý ngay lập tức
• snowball into: tích tụ và phát triển thành (vấn đề lớn hơn)
• take a step back: lùi lại một bước, bình tĩnh
• cooling-off period: thời gian nguội đầu
• approach the situation rationally: tiếp cận tình huống một cách lý trí
• process their feelings: xử lý cảm xúc của họ

Học viên IELTS Speaking đang luyện tập trả lời câu hỏi về xử lý xung đột với giáo viên trong lớp học

IELTS Speaking Part 2: Long Turn (Cue Card)

Tổng Quan Về Part 2

Part 2 là phần độc thoại kéo dài 2-3 phút, trong đó bạn sẽ nhận được một cue card và có 1 phút để chuẩn bị. Đây là phần quan trọng nhất để thể hiện khả năng nói liên tục và tự nhiên của bạn.

Thời gian:

• 1 phút chuẩn bị
• 2-3 phút nói (không bị ngắt)

Đặc điểm:

• Kể chi tiết về một trải nghiệm cụ thể
• Cần trả lời đủ tất cả các bullet points
• Sử dụng thì quá khứ khi kể về sự việc đã xảy ra

Chiến lược:

• Sử dụng hết 1 phút chuẩn bị để ghi chú keywords (không viết câu hoàn chỉnh)
• Nói đủ 2 phút, tốt nhất là gần 2.5-3 phút
• Sử dụng các discourse markers để câu chuyện mạch lạc
• Thêm cảm xúc và chi tiết để câu chuyện sinh động

Lỗi thường gặp:

• Không sử dụng hết thời gian chuẩn bị
• Nói dưới 1.5 phút
• Bỏ sót một hoặc nhiều bullet points
• Kể chuyện nhảy lung tung, thiếu logic

Để hiểu rõ hơn về cách xử lý các tình huống phức tạp trong IELTS Speaking, bạn có thể tham khảo thêm describe a time when you faced an unexpected problem để nắm vững thêm kỹ năng kể chuyện về những thử thách bất ngờ.

Cue Card

Describe a time when you successfully managed a conflict

You should say:

• When and where it happened
• Who was involved in the conflict
• What the conflict was about
• And explain how you managed to resolve it successfully

Phân Tích Đề Bài

Dạng câu hỏi: Describe an experience/event – Kể về một trải nghiệm cụ thể trong quá khứ

Thì động từ: Chủ yếu sử dụng Past Simple và Past Continuous để kể chuyện

Bullet points phải cover:

1. When and where: Xác định rõ thời gian và địa điểm – có thể là “last year at my workplace” hoặc “during my university days”
2. Who was involved: Những người liên quan – có thể là bạn bè, đồng nghiệp, gia đình, hoặc người lạ
3. What the conflict was about: Nội dung xung đột – đây là phần quan trọng cần mô tả chi tiết
4. How you resolved it: Phần này là trọng tâm – cần giải thích cụ thể các bước bạn đã làm và tại sao thành công

Câu “explain” quan trọng: Đây là phần ghi điểm cao nhất. Bạn cần thể hiện:

• Kỹ năng communication và problem-solving
• Sự trưởng thành trong suy nghĩ
• Bài học rút ra từ kinh nghiệm

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7

Thời lượng: Khoảng 1.5-2 phút

“I’d like to talk about a conflict I had with my roommate during my second year at university. This happened about two years ago when I was living in a shared apartment near the campus.

The conflict was with my roommate, Nam, who was also a university student. We had been living together for about six months when the problem started. The main issue was about cleanliness and housework. Nam rarely cleaned the apartment or washed the dishes. He always left his things everywhere, and the kitchen was always messy after he cooked. I felt frustrated because I had to clean up after him all the time.

At first, I didn’t say anything because I didn’t want to create problems. But after a few weeks, I couldn’t stand it anymore. One evening, I decided to talk to him. I told him that I was unhappy about the situation and that we needed to share the housework equally. At first, he was a bit defensive and said he was too busy with his studies. But I explained that I was also busy but still made time to clean.

We discussed the problem and came up with a solution. We created a schedule for housework. Each week, we would take turns cleaning different parts of the apartment. We also agreed to clean our own dishes immediately after eating.

The solution worked really well. After that conversation, our relationship improved, and the apartment was much cleaner. I learned that it’s important to communicate directly instead of keeping problems inside. If I had talked to him earlier, we could have solved the problem sooner.”

Phân Tích Band Điểm

Tiêu chí	Band	Nhận xét
Fluency & Coherence	6-7	Câu chuyện có cấu trúc rõ ràng với beginning, middle, end. Sử dụng linking words cơ bản (at first, but, after that). Có một số hesitation nhẹ nhưng không ảnh hưởng nhiều đến message
Lexical Resource	6-7	Từ vựng adequate cho topic (frustrated, defensive, solution, schedule). Có một số collocations đơn giản (create problems, came up with a solution). Thiếu vocabulary range và sophistication
Grammatical Range & Accuracy	6-7	Sử dụng đúng Past Simple và Past Continuous. Có một số câu phức (when clauses, because clauses). Chưa có nhiều cấu trúc phức tạp như conditionals hay passive voice
Pronunciation	6-7	Rõ ràng và dễ hiểu. Word stress và sentence stress cơ bản đúng. Có thể có một số lỗi phát âm nhỏ ở từ khó

Điểm mạnh:

• ✅ Trả lời đầy đủ tất cả các bullet points
• ✅ Có cấu trúc rõ ràng, dễ theo dõi
• ✅ Sử dụng thì quá khứ chính xác
• ✅ Có kết luận với bài học rút ra

Hạn chế:

• ⚠️ Từ vựng còn đơn giản, thiếu collocations và idiomatic expressions
• ⚠️ Cấu trúc câu chưa đa dạng, chủ yếu là simple và compound sentences
• ⚠️ Thiếu chi tiết cảm xúc và descriptive language
• ⚠️ Chưa thể hiện sự sophisticated trong reasoning

📝 Sample Answer – Band 7.5-8

Thời lượng: Khoảng 2-2.5 phút

“I’d like to share an experience from last year when I successfully mediated a dispute between two of my team members during a group project at work.

This took place in my office in Ho Chi Minh City, where I work as a project coordinator for a marketing firm. The conflict involved two colleagues, Minh and Huong, who were both working on an important campaign for one of our major clients. The tension had been building for about two weeks, and it was starting to affect the team’s productivity.

The root of the problem was quite common in workplace environments – it stemmed from different working styles and miscommunication. Minh preferred to work independently and make quick decisions, while Huong liked to collaborate extensively and deliberate over every detail. This clash of approaches came to a head when Minh made a significant change to the campaign design without consulting Huong, who felt her input had been disregarded.

Recognizing that the situation was escalating, I decided to take action before it spiraled out of control. I arranged a private meeting with both of them in a neutral space – a quiet meeting room. I started by setting ground rules for the discussion: each person would have uninterrupted time to share their perspective, and we would focus on finding solutions rather than assigning blame.

During the meeting, I actively listened to both sides and helped them see that they actually shared the same goal – delivering an excellent campaign. I facilitated a compromise where we established clear guidelines: major decisions would require input from both of them, but minor adjustments could be made independently with a quick notification.

The resolution was remarkably successful. Not only did they complete the project on time, but they also developed mutual respect for each other’s strengths. Minh learned to appreciate Huong’s attention to detail, while Huong recognized the value of Minh’s decisiveness. What I found most rewarding was seeing them voluntarily collaborate on future projects.

This experience taught me that conflicts often arise from fundamental misunderstandings rather than genuine personality clashes. The key to successful conflict resolution is creating a safe environment where people feel heard and facilitating dialogue that helps them find common ground.”

Phân Tích Band Điểm

Tiêu chí	Band	Nhận xét
Fluency & Coherence	7.5-8	Speaks fluently với minimal hesitation. Discourse markers tự nhiên (not only…but also, while, during). Ý tưởng được develop logically và coherently
Lexical Resource	7.5-8	Wide range of vocabulary với nhiều collocations chính xác (mediate a dispute, tension had been building, spiral out of control). Sử dụng less common phrases (came to a head, assigning blame)
Grammatical Range & Accuracy	7.5-8	Variety of complex structures (relative clauses, passive voice, conditionals). Errors minimal và không ảnh hưởng communication
Pronunciation	7.5-8	Clear và easy to understand. Good control of word và sentence stress. Intonation patterns natural

So Sánh Với Band 6-7

Khía cạnh	Band 6-7	Band 7.5-8
Vocabulary	“create problems”, “came up with a solution”	“mediate a dispute”, “tension had been building”, “facilitate a compromise”
Grammar	“At first, I didn’t say anything because I didn’t want to create problems” (simple reason clause)	“Recognizing that the situation was escalating, I decided to take action before it spiraled out of control” (participle phrase + before clause)
Ideas	Conflict về housework, solution là tạo schedule	Conflict về working styles trong professional context, solution sophisticated hơn với mediation process
Details	Chi tiết cơ bản về vấn đề và giải pháp	Chi tiết phong phú về emotions, process, và long-term impact

Khi xử lý xung đột, việc thể hiện khả năng lãnh đạo cũng rất quan trọng. Bạn có thể xem thêm describe a time when you had to lead a project to success để học cách kết hợp kỹ năng giải quyết xung đột với leadership skills trong câu trả lời của mình.

Bản ghi chú chuẩn bị cho bài nói IELTS Speaking Part 2 về quản lý xung đột với các từ khóa quan trọng

📝 Sample Answer – Band 8.5-9

Thời lượng: 2.5-3 phút đầy đủ

“I’d like to recount a particularly challenging situation I encountered approximately eighteen months ago when I found myself navigating a delicate conflict between two senior managers at the company where I work.

The incident unfolded at our head office in Hanoi, during what was supposed to be a routine quarterly planning meeting. The protagonists in this conflict were Ms. Lan, our Head of Sales, and Mr. Tuan, our Director of Operations – both highly experienced professionals with strong personalities and deeply entrenched positions on how we should allocate our limited resources for the upcoming quarter.

The crux of the disagreement centered on resource allocation, but it was symptomatic of deeper organizational tensions that had been simmering beneath the surface for months. Ms. Lan was adamant that we needed to channel more funds into marketing initiatives to capitalize on emerging market opportunities, while Mr. Tuan maintained that operational improvements should take precedence to ensure we could meet increased demand without compromising on quality. What started as a professional debate quickly devolved into a heated exchange, with both parties becoming increasingly entrenched in their positions and the atmosphere growing palpably tense.

Recognizing the potential ramifications of this conflict – not just for the project but for team morale and our working relationships – I knew I needed to intervene, despite being more junior than both of them. However, I understood that direct confrontation would likely backfire spectacularly, so I opted for a more nuanced approach.

Rather than positioning myself as an arbiter, I suggested we take a step back and reframe the discussion. I proposed that we adjourn the meeting and reconvene the following day, but with a different format. I requested that each manager prepare a detailed analysis showing not just their preferred option, but also the potential drawbacks and how these might be mitigated. More importantly, I asked them to identify areas where their proposals might actually be complementary rather than contradictory.

The next day’s meeting had a markedly different tenor. Having had time to reflect objectively on the situation, both managers came to the table with more measured perspectives. The analysis revealed something fascinating – they weren’t actually as far apart as it had seemed. Through facilitated discussion, we uncovered a hybrid solution that allocated resources to both areas but phased the implementation strategically. We would prioritize operational improvements initially to build capacity, then ramp up marketing efforts once we were confident we could handle the influx of business.

What made this resolution particularly successful wasn’t just that we found a compromise, but that both managers felt their concerns had been validated and their expertise respected. They emerged from the process with renewed mutual appreciation for each other’s domain knowledge and a shared commitment to the integrated strategy.

Reflecting on this experience, I’ve come to realize that many conflicts arise not from irreconcilable differences but from tunnel vision where people become so fixated on their position that they lose sight of shared objectives. The resolution hinged on creating space for reflection, reframing the narrative from competition to collaboration, and helping people see beyond their immediate departmental interests to the broader organizational goals. It reinforced my belief that effective conflict management isn’t about imposing solutions but about creating conditions where parties can arrive at their own synthesis – a lesson that has proven invaluable in my subsequent professional endeavors.”

Phân Tích Band Điểm

Tiêu chí	Band	Nhận xét
Fluency & Coherence	8.5-9	Speaks fluently và effortlessly với very natural flow. Sophisticated use of discourse markers. Ideas developed với remarkable coherence và logical progression
Lexical Resource	8.5-9	Wide vocabulary range với precise và sophisticated choices. Natural use of idiomatic language (backfire spectacularly, came to the table, tunnel vision). Collocations perfectly appropriate
Grammatical Range & Accuracy	8.5-9	Full range of structures với complete flexibility và accuracy. Complex sentences managed effortlessly. Errors extremely rare và không ảnh hưởng communication
Pronunciation	8.5-9	Fully intelligible với sustained appropriate features. Excellent control of intonation, stress và rhythm. Native-like hoặc near-native delivery

Tại Sao Bài Này Xuất Sắc

🎯 Fluency Hoàn Hảo:
Bài nói có độ trôi chảy exceptional với zero hesitation. Các ý tưởng được connect seamlessly thông qua sophisticated discourse markers như “Rather than”, “More importantly”, “Reflecting on this experience”. Không có filler words hay repetition không cần thiết.

📚 Vocabulary Tinh Vi:

• “navigating a delicate conflict” – sophisticated alternative cho “dealing with a conflict”
• “deeply entrenched positions” – thể hiện stubbornness một cách academic và precise
• “symptomatic of deeper organizational tensions” – shows ability to analyze root causes
• “devolved into” – advanced verb choice thay vì “turned into”
• “palpably tense” – descriptive language với appropriate adverb-adjective collocation
• “backfire spectacularly” – idiomatic expression với intensifying adverb
• “markedly different tenor” – sophisticated vocabulary choice cho atmosphere

📝 Grammar Đa Dạng:

• Participial phrases: “Recognizing the potential ramifications…” – shows advanced grammar control
• Cleft sentences: “What made this resolution particularly successful wasn’t just that…”
• Inversion: “Having had time to reflect…” – demonstrates grammatical range
• Complex conditionals: Implied conditional structures throughout
• Passive voice: “concerns had been validated” – appropriate use for effect
• Relative clauses: “the company where I work” – smooth integration

💡 Ideas Sâu Sắc:
Câu trả lời không chỉ kể story mà còn demonstrate:

• Critical analysis của situation (identifying root causes beyond surface conflict)
• Strategic thinking trong approach (nuanced vs direct confrontation)
• Emotional intelligence (understanding need for validation and respect)
• Reflective practice (drawing broader lessons from specific experience)
• Sophisticated understanding của organizational dynamics

Sự trưởng thành trong cách nhìn nhận được thể hiện qua việc recognize rằng conflict resolution không phải về “winning” mà về creating conditions for synthesis – một insight rất mature và professional.

Follow-up Questions (Rounding Off Questions)

Examiner có thể hỏi thêm 1-2 câu ngắn sau Part 2:

Question 1: Do you think this experience changed how you approach conflicts now?

Band 6-7 Answer:
“Yes, definitely. Now I try to talk to people directly when there’s a problem instead of waiting. I also learned to listen to both sides before making a decision.”

Band 8-9 Answer:
“Absolutely, it was quite transformative in that regard. I’ve become much more attuned to the underlying dynamics at play in disagreements and less reactive to surface-level tensions. I now instinctively create space for reflection rather than rushing to resolution, which I’ve found leads to more sustainable outcomes.”

Question 2: Would you handle it differently if it happened again?

Band 6-7 Answer:
“I think I would do mostly the same things because it worked well. Maybe I would act faster to solve the problem before it gets bigger.”

Band 8-9 Answer:
“That’s an interesting question. While the core principles would remain the same, I think I’d front-load more preventative measures by establishing clearer communication protocols from the outset. I’ve since learned that anticipating potential friction points and addressing them proactively is often more effective than even the most skillful reactive intervention.”

IELTS Speaking Part 3: Two-way Discussion

Tổng Quan Về Part 3

Part 3 là phần thảo luận sâu kéo dài 4-5 phút, trong đó examiner sẽ hỏi những câu hỏi trừu tượng và conceptual liên quan đến chủ đề của Part 2. Đây là phần khó nhất nhưng cũng là cơ hội để bạn thể hiện khả năng phân tích và critical thinking.

Yêu cầu:

• Phân tích, so sánh, đánh giá các khía cạnh khác nhau của vấn đề
• Đưa ra quan điểm cá nhân có lý lẽ rõ ràng
• Xem xét nhiều perspectives của vấn đề
• Sử dụng examples từ society, không chỉ personal experiences

Chiến lược:

• Mở rộng câu trả lời (3-5 câu minimum)
• Sử dụng discourse markers (Well, I think, From my perspective…)
• Structure câu trả lời: Direct answer → Reason 1 + example → Reason 2 → Conclusion/nuance
• Thừa nhận complexity của issues (it depends, however, on the other hand)
• Sử dụng tentative language (I would say, It seems to me, Perhaps…)

Lỗi thường gặp của học viên Việt Nam:

• Trả lời quá ngắn, thiếu elaboration
• Không đưa ra reasoning rõ ràng
• Thiếu từ vựng trừu tượng (abstract nouns, academic vocabulary)
• Không acknowledge different perspectives
• Speaking quá cá nhân, thiếu societal perspective

Việc giải quyết xung đột thành công thường đi kèm với cảm giác tự hào và thành tựu. Nếu bạn muốn mở rộng góc nhìn về cách kể những câu chuyện thành công cá nhân, hãy xem describe a time when you felt very proud of yourself để học thêm cách thể hiện cảm xúc và thành quả một cách ấn tượng.

Các Câu Hỏi Thảo Luận Sâu

Theme 1: Conflict Resolution Skills

Question 1: Why do you think some people are better at resolving conflicts than others?

🎯 Phân tích câu hỏi:

• Dạng: Cause/Reason question – yêu cầu explain factors
• Key words: “some people”, “better at” – cần so sánh và identify các yếu tố
• Cách tiếp cận: Đưa ra 2-3 main factors với examples, acknowledge complexity

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

“I think some people are naturally better at communication. They know how to talk to others in a calm way and listen carefully. Also, people who have more life experience usually handle conflicts better because they’ve seen similar problems before. For example, older people in my family are usually better at solving family arguments than younger members.”

Phân tích:

• Structure: Có hai reasons (communication skills và experience) với example
• Vocabulary: Basic vocabulary (naturally better, calm way, life experience)
• Tại sao Band 6-7: Truyền đạt ý rõ ràng nhưng thiếu sophistication trong analysis và vocabulary

📝 Câu trả lời mẫu – Band 8-9:

“Well, I’d say it boils down to a combination of innate temperament and acquired skills. Some individuals are naturally more emotionally intelligent – they have an intuitive grasp of social dynamics and can read between the lines when tensions arise. They’re attuned to subtle cues in body language and tone that others might miss.

However, I think learned competencies play an equally significant role. People who’ve been exposed to diverse perspectives or who’ve received formal training in negotiation tend to have a more sophisticated toolkit for conflict management. They understand concepts like active listening, de-escalation techniques, and finding common ground.

What’s particularly interesting is that cultural background also shapes conflict resolution abilities. In collectivist societies like Vietnam, people often develop strong mediation skills because maintaining harmony is culturally prioritized. Conversely, those from more individualistic cultures might be more comfortable with direct confrontation.

At the end of the day, the most adept conflict resolvers are typically those who combine natural empathy with deliberate practice and a willingness to step outside their comfort zone to understand opposing viewpoints.”

Phân tích:

• Structure: Well-organized với multiple factors explored systematically – innate abilities → learned skills → cultural factors → synthesis
• Vocabulary: Sophisticated choices (innate temperament, emotionally intelligent, intuitive grasp, attuned to, de-escalation techniques, adept)
• Grammar: Complex structures (relative clauses, cleft sentences “What’s particularly interesting”, contrast with “Conversely”)
• Critical Thinking: Shows nuanced understanding với multiple perspectives, cultural awareness, acknowledges complexity

💡 Key Language Features:

• Discourse markers: “Well”, “However”, “Conversely”, “At the end of the day”
• Tentative language: “I’d say”, “tend to”, “typically”
• Abstract nouns: temperament, competencies, perspectives, dynamics, synthesis
• Phrasal verbs: boils down to, read between the lines, step outside comfort zone

---

Question 2: Do you think conflict resolution should be taught in schools?

🎯 Phân tích câu hỏi:

• Dạng: Opinion question với “should” – yêu cầu take a stance
• Key words: “taught in schools” – education context
• Cách tiếp cận: Give clear opinion → reasons with examples → acknowledge potential challenges

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

“Yes, I definitely think so. Students often have disagreements with classmates, so learning how to solve conflicts is useful. If schools teach these skills, students will be better prepared for adult life. They will know how to communicate better at work and in relationships.”

Phân tích:

• Structure: Clear opinion với basic supporting reasons
• Vocabulary: Simple và repetitive (disagreements, better prepared, communicate better)
• Tại sao Band 6-7: Message clear nhưng lacks depth và sophisticated vocabulary

📝 Câu trả lời mẫu – Band 8-9:

“Absolutely, I’m a firm advocate for integrating conflict resolution into the core curriculum. The reality is that interpersonal conflicts are inevitable in virtually every sphere of life, yet most people learn to handle them through trial and error rather than systematic instruction.

Early exposure to conflict resolution frameworks would equip students with essential life skills that extend far beyond the classroom. We’re talking about abilities like perspective-taking, emotional regulation, and constructive communication – all of which are foundational not just for personal relationships but for professional success and civic engagement.

Moreover, teaching these skills at a young age could have far-reaching societal benefits. If we cultivate a generation that’s more adept at dialogue and less prone to escalation, we might see spillover effects in reduced workplace conflicts, healthier relationships, and perhaps even more constructive political discourse.

That said, implementation would require careful consideration. The curriculum would need to be age-appropriate and culturally sensitive, perhaps incorporating role-play scenarios and real-world applications rather than purely theoretical instruction. We’d also need to ensure teachers receive adequate training to facilitate these discussions effectively.

On balance, despite the logistical challenges, I believe the potential dividends – both for individuals and society at large – make this an investment worth making.”

Phân tích:

• Structure: Sophisticated organization – direct opinion → benefits with elaboration → broader societal impact → practical considerations → balanced conclusion
• Vocabulary: Rich và varied (firm advocate, systematic instruction, foundational, cultivate a generation, spillover effects, constructive discourse, potential dividends)
• Grammar: Wide range (conditionals “If we cultivate…”, passive voice “implementation would require”, nominalization)
• Critical Thinking: Balanced view acknowledging both benefits và challenges, considers multiple levels (individual, professional, societal)

💡 Key Language Features:

• Academic style: “integrating into core curriculum”, “systematic instruction”, “foundational”
• Cause-effect language: “would equip”, “could have far-reaching benefits”, “might see spillover effects”
• Hedging: “perhaps even”, “On balance”
• Collocations: “firm advocate”, “trial and error”, “age-appropriate”, “adequate training”

---

Theme 2: Workplace Conflicts

Question 1: What types of conflicts are most common in modern workplaces?

🎯 Phân tích câu hỏi:

• Dạng: Classification/Category question
• Key words: “most common”, “modern workplaces” – cần identify patterns trong contemporary context
• Cách tiếp cận: Categorize different types với examples, explain why they’re prevalent

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

“In my opinion, the most common conflicts at work are about different opinions on how to do tasks. People also argue about working hours and responsibilities. Sometimes there are problems because of personality differences – some people are difficult to work with. Competition for promotions can also cause conflicts between colleagues.”

Phân tích:

• Structure: Lists several types nhưng không develop deeply
• Vocabulary: Basic vocabulary (different opinions, argue about, difficult to work with)
• Tại sao Band 6-7: Adequate coverage nhưng lacks depth và sophisticated analysis

📝 Câu trả lời mẫu – Band 8-9:

“That’s an insightful question. I’d argue that modern workplace conflicts typically fall into several distinct categories, each reflecting the evolving nature of professional environments.

First and foremost, we’re seeing increasing tensions around work-life boundaries, particularly exacerbated by the shift to remote and hybrid models. The blurring of lines between professional and personal time has created fertile ground for disagreements about availability expectations and response times. For instance, some colleagues might view a Slack message at 9 PM as perfectly reasonable, while others consider it an intrusion into personal time.

Equally prevalent are conflicts stemming from generational divides in workplace values and communication preferences. Younger employees often gravitate toward digital-first, informal communication, while more experienced colleagues might prefer face-to-face interactions or formal protocols. These stylistic differences can breed misunderstandings if not properly addressed.

Resource allocation remains a perennial source of friction, especially in resource-constrained environments. When multiple teams are competing for limited budgets or personnel, conflicts can quickly emerge and escalate if there isn’t transparent decision-making.

What’s particularly noteworthy about contemporary workplace conflicts is their increasing intersectionality with issues of diversity and inclusion. Disagreements may surface around unconscious bias, microaggressions, or differing perspectives on what constitutes appropriate workplace behavior – conflicts that require considerably more nuance to navigate than traditional task-based disputes.

Underpinning many of these conflicts is what I’d call communication breakdown – whether that’s misinterpreted tone in written messages, incomplete information sharing, or assumptions left unexamined. In our increasingly fast-paced and digitally-mediated workplaces, the margin for miscommunication has arguably widened considerably.”

Phân tích:

• Structure: Exceptional organization với clear categorization, each type fully developed với contemporary context
• Vocabulary: Sophisticated và precise (exacerbated by, fertile ground, intrusion, gravitate toward, breed misunderstandings, perennial source, intersectionality, microaggressions, underpinning)
• Grammar: Complex structures throughout (participle phrases, relative clauses, conditionals)
• Critical Thinking: Deep analysis với modern workplace trends, acknowledges complexity và interconnections

💡 Key Language Features:

• Classification language: “fall into distinct categories”, “First and foremost”, “Equally prevalent”
• Academic expressions: “reflecting the evolving nature”, “particularly noteworthy”, “Underpinning many”
• Contemporary vocabulary: “remote and hybrid models”, “digital-first”, “unconscious bias”, “microaggressions”

Nhân viên văn phòng đang thảo luận giải quyết xung đột một cách chuyên nghiệp trong phòng họp hiện đại

Question 2: How have workplace conflicts changed with the rise of remote work?

🎯 Phân tích câu hỏi:

• Dạng: Change/Comparison question – past vs present
• Key words: “changed”, “remote work” – cần so sánh và analyze impact
• Cách tiếp cận: Identify key changes, explain causes, discuss implications

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

“Remote work has made some conflicts harder to solve. When people work from home, they don’t see each other face-to-face, so misunderstandings happen more easily. Email and chat messages can be misunderstood because you can’t see the person’s expression. Also, some people feel isolated and this can create problems with team communication.”

Phân tích:

• Structure: Mentions key changes nhưng không deeply analyze
• Vocabulary: Basic vocabulary (harder to solve, misunderstandings, misunderstood, isolated)
• Tại sao Band 6-7: Identifies relevant points nhưng lacks sophisticated analysis

📝 Câu trả lời mẫu – Band 8-9:

“The advent of remote work has fundamentally altered the landscape of workplace conflicts in several compelling ways.

Most notably, there’s been a pronounced shift from overt, immediate conflicts to what I’d call latent, accumulative tensions. In traditional office settings, disagreements often surfaced quickly through informal interactions – you’d notice someone’s frustration or clear the air during a coffee break. Remote work has eliminated these organic opportunities for spontaneous resolution, meaning small grievances can fester unaddressed until they blow up into major conflicts.

The medium itself has become a source of friction. Text-based communication strips away crucial nonverbal cues – tone, facial expressions, body language – that help us gauge intent and soften disagreements. A message intended as constructive feedback can be interpreted as harsh criticism. I’ve observed that conflicts in remote settings often stem from what linguists call ‘pragmatic failure’ – mismatches between intended and perceived meaning.

Paradoxically, while remote work was meant to offer flexibility, it’s created new categories of conflict around availability and responsiveness. Without the physical cues of someone being at their desk, there are unspoken expectations about response times that vary wildly between individuals and can breed resentment. One person’s reasonable boundary is another’s perceived neglect.

What’s particularly interesting is how remote work has amplified existing inequities, creating friction points that weren’t as visible before. Employees with inadequate home office setups, caregiving responsibilities, or poor internet connectivity may struggle disproportionately, leading to performance-based conflicts that are actually rooted in circumstantial disadvantages rather than competence issues.

On the flip side, remote work has also mitigated certain conflicts. Personality clashes that arise from physical proximity – someone’s eating habits, conversational style, or workspace behavior – become non-issues when you’re not sharing office space. Status-based tensions may also be somewhat diffused when everyone’s a Brady Bunch square on a Zoom call.

Looking ahead, I suspect we’ll see organizations developing more sophisticated protocols for preempting and managing these remote-specific conflicts, perhaps incorporating more synchronous video check-ins to restore some of that lost spontaneity and investing in explicit digital communication training.”

Phân tích:

• Structure: Highly sophisticated với multiple dimensions explored – nature of conflicts → communication challenges → availability issues → equity concerns → positive aspects → future implications
• Vocabulary: Exceptionally rich (advent, fundamentally altered, pronounced shift, latent tensions, fester unaddressed, strips away, gauge intent, pragmatic failure, amplified existing inequities, mitigated certain conflicts)
• Grammar: Full range with perfect control (participle phrases, relative clauses, conditionals, passive constructions)
• Critical Thinking: Exceptional depth with balanced analysis (acknowledges both challenges và unexpected benefits), considers multiple stakeholders, forward-looking perspective

💡 Key Language Features:

• Change language: “fundamentally altered”, “pronounced shift”, “eliminated”, “amplified”
• Contrast markers: “Paradoxically”, “On the flip side”
• Academic expressions: “what linguists call”, “rooted in”, “Looking ahead”
• Tech-specific vocabulary: “text-based communication”, “Brady Bunch square”, “Zoom call”, “synchronous video”

---

Theme 3: Cultural Differences in Conflict Management

Question 1: How do cultural differences affect the way people handle conflicts?

🎯 Phân tích câu hỏi:

• Dạng: Cause-effect/Explanation question
• Key words: “cultural differences”, “affect” – cần explain mechanisms của cultural influence
• Cách tiếp cận: Compare different cultural approaches, explain underlying values, provide examples

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

“Different cultures handle conflicts in different ways. In Asian cultures like Vietnam, people usually try to avoid direct confrontation because they want to maintain harmony. They prefer to solve problems quietly. But in Western cultures, people are more direct and they say what they think openly. Both ways have advantages and disadvantages.”

Phân tích:

• Structure: Basic comparison Asian vs Western
• Vocabulary: Simple và somewhat stereotypical (avoid confrontation, maintain harmony, more direct)
• Tại sao Band 6-7: Makes valid points nhưng analysis lacks nuance và depth

📝 Câu trả lời mẫu – Band 8-9:

“Cultural orientation profoundly shapes not just conflict resolution strategies but the very perception of what constitutes a conflict in the first place.

In high-context cultures – prevalent across much of Asia, including Vietnam – conflict management tends to be characterized by indirectness and a premium placed on preserving social harmony. There’s often an implicit understanding that overt disagreement risks causing someone to lose face, which carries significant social consequences. Consequently, people in these cultures often employ intermediaries, use subtle hints, or simply endure minor grievances rather than addressing them head-on. This approach stems from deeply rooted collectivist values where group cohesion takes precedence over individual expression.

Conversely, low-context cultures – typified by the United States, Germany, and Scandinavian countries – tend to favor direct, explicit communication. Conflicts are often viewed as natural and potentially productive rather than something to be avoided. There’s an expectation of transparency where people voice concerns openly and engage in what they consider healthy debate. This approach reflects individualistic values that prioritize authenticity and personal boundaries.

However, I think it’s crucial to move beyond these broad generalizations. Within any culture, there’s tremendous variation based on factors like generational differences, urbanization, and educational background. A young professional in Ho Chi Minh City who’s been exposed to international work cultures might display conflict behaviors quite different from someone in a rural area, despite sharing the same national culture.

What’s particularly fascinating is how these cultural patterns play out in increasingly globalized workplaces. Multicultural teams often experience what researchers call ‘process conflict’ – not disagreements about tasks but about how to approach disagreement itself. A well-intentioned directness from a Dutch colleague might be perceived as unnecessarily aggressive by a Japanese team member, while the Japanese colleague’s carefully worded concerns might be dismissed as insufficiently clear.

The most effective conflict managers in cross-cultural contexts are those who’ve developed what I’d call ‘cultural code-switching’ – the ability to adapt their approach based on the cultural context while maintaining their core problem-solving objectives. They recognize that there’s no universally superior method, just different culturally-embedded approaches that each have situational advantages.”

Phân tích:

• Structure: Exceptional depth với systematic comparison → nuance và variation → practical implications → sophisticated conclusion
• Vocabulary: Highly sophisticated (high-context cultures, premium placed on, lose face, employ intermediaries, stems from, takes precedence over, move beyond broad generalizations, culturally-embedded approaches)
• Grammar: Complex structures perfectly controlled (participle phrases, relative clauses, nominalization)
• Critical Thinking: Outstanding analysis acknowledging complexity, avoiding stereotypes, considering modern contexts, providing framework for understanding

💡 Key Language Features:

• Academic terminology: “high-context cultures”, “low-context cultures”, “collectivist values”, “individualistic values”, “process conflict”
• Nuancing language: “However”, “I think it’s crucial to”, “tremendous variation”, “not…but…”
• Cross-cultural awareness: References specific countries/regions, acknowledges diversity within cultures
• Synthesis: “cultural code-switching” as sophisticated conclusion

Nếu bạn muốn tìm hiểu thêm về cách xây dựng mối quan hệ tích cực sau khi giải quyết xung đột, describe a conversation with a stranger that left a positive impression sẽ cung cấp góc nhìn bổ sung về kỹ năng giao tiếp tạo ấn tượng tốt.

Question 2: Do you think younger generations are better or worse at managing conflicts than older generations?

🎯 Phân tích câu hỏi:

• Dạng: Comparison + Opinion với generational context
• Key words: “younger generations”, “better or worse” – cần balanced comparison
• Cách tiếp cận: Avoid absolute statements, consider different aspects, acknowledge trade-offs

📝 Sample Answer – Band 6-7:

“I think it depends on the situation. Young people today are more open-minded and they know more about psychology, so they understand emotions better. However, older people have more life experience, so they can stay calm in difficult situations. Both generations can learn from each other.”

Phân tích:

• Structure: Attempts balance với “it depends”
• Vocabulary: Basic vocabulary (open-minded, life experience, stay calm)
• Tại sao Band 6-7: Shows some nuance nhưng lacks depth và sophisticated analysis

📝 Câu trả lời mẫu – Band 8-9:

“That’s a nuanced question that I think defies simple categorization because each generation brings distinct strengths and limitations to conflict management.

Younger generations – particularly Millennials and Gen Z – have grown up with unprecedented access to resources about emotional intelligence, communication skills, and mental health. They’re generally more versed in concepts like active listening, setting boundaries, and recognizing cognitive biases. There’s also less stigma around seeking help, whether through therapy or mediation, which means they’re often more willing to acknowledge when they need support in resolving conflicts.

Moreover, their digital nativeness has equipped them with unique skills for navigating conflicts in online spaces – understanding how to de-escalate situations in group chats or knowing when to take conversations offline. They tend to be more attuned to issues of inclusion and microaggressions, bringing heightened sensitivity to conflicts with social justice dimensions.

That said, this same generation faces distinct challenges. Extensive reliance on text-based communication may have eroded some face-to-face negotiation skills. There’s research suggesting that younger people experience higher anxiety around direct confrontation, potentially stemming from reduced practice with in-person difficult conversations during formative years. The instant gratification culture of social media might also foster impatience with the often time-consuming process of working through complex interpersonal issues.

Conversely, older generations bring hard-won experiential wisdom – they’ve simply encountered more variations of human conflict and developed pattern recognition that helps them anticipate pitfalls. They often demonstrate greater comfort with uncomfortable silences and have cultivated the patience that comes from understanding that some conflicts resolve themselves with time.

However, they may sometimes be more rigid in their approaches, less receptive to newer frameworks for understanding conflict, or carry outdated assumptions about workplace hierarchy and gender dynamics that can actually exacerbate modern conflicts.

In my view, rather than framing this as a competition, we should recognize it as an opportunity for intergenerational learning. The ideal conflict resolver might combine the younger generation’s awareness of psychological frameworks and inclusive sensitivity with the older generation’s emotional steadiness and experiential pattern recognition. Organizations that facilitate mentorship in both directions – not just older teaching younger, but also reverse mentoring – tend to develop more robust conflict resolution cultures.”

Phân tích:

• Structure: Sophisticated và balanced với systematic exploration – younger generation strengths → challenges → older generation strengths → limitations → synthesis
• Vocabulary: Exceptionally rich (defies simple categorization, unprecedented access, versed in, digital nativeness, heightened sensitivity, hard-won experiential wisdom, exacerbate, reverse mentoring)
• Grammar: Full range with perfect accuracy (complex conditionals, participle phrases, nominalization)
• Critical Thinking: Outstanding depth avoiding stereotypes, acknowledges complexity, provides balanced view, offers constructive synthesis

💡 Key Language Features:

• Nuancing language: “nuanced question”, “That said”, “Conversely”, “rather than framing this as”
• Generational terminology: “Millennials and Gen Z”, “digital nativeness”, “instant gratification culture”, “intergenerational learning”
• Academic expressions: “defies simple categorization”, “experiential wisdom”, “pattern recognition”
• Synthesis language: “combine”, “facilitate mentorship”, “robust conflict resolution cultures”

Từ vựng và cụm từ quan trọng

Topic-Specific Vocabulary

Từ vựng/Cụm từ	Loại từ	Phiên âm	Nghĩa tiếng Việt	Ví dụ	Collocation
mediate a dispute	v. phrase	/ˈmiːdieɪt ə dɪˈspjuːt/	hòa giải tranh chấp	I had to mediate a dispute between two team members.	successfully mediate, attempt to mediate, help mediate
tension	n.	/ˈtenʃn/	căng thẳng, xung đột âm ỉ	The tension between them had been building for weeks.	mounting tension, ease tension, underlying tension
escalate	v.	/ˈeskəleɪt/	leo thang, trở nên nghiêm trọng hơn	The argument quickly escalated into a heated confrontation.	rapidly escalate, escalate into, prevent from escalating
resolution	n.	/ˌrezəˈluːʃn/	sự giải quyết, phương án	We reached a resolution that satisfied both parties.	peaceful resolution, conflict resolution, reach a resolution
compromise	n./v.	/ˈkɒmprəmaɪz/	sự thỏa hiệp; thỏa hiệp	Both sides had to compromise to end the dispute.	reach a compromise, fair compromise, willing to compromise
reconciliation	n.	/ˌrekənsɪliˈeɪʃn/	sự hòa giải, làm hòa	The reconciliation process took several weeks.	achieve reconciliation, path to reconciliation
animosity	n.	/ˌænɪˈmɒsəti/	sự thù địch, ác cảm	There was deep animosity between the two colleagues.	deep animosity, harbor animosity, personal animosity
de-escalate	v.	/diːˈeskəleɪt/	làm dịu, giảm căng thẳng	I tried to de-escalate the situation by staying calm.	attempt to de-escalate, successfully de-escalate
common ground	n. phrase	/ˈkɒmən ɡraʊnd/	điểm chung, tiếng nói chung	We needed to find common ground before moving forward.	find common ground, establish common ground, seek common ground
heated argument	n. phrase	/ˈhiːtɪd ˈɑːɡjumənt/	cuộc tranh cãi gay gắt	The meeting turned into a heated argument.	engage in, avoid, calm down a heated argument
misunderstanding	n.	/ˌmɪsʌndəˈstændɪŋ/	sự hiểu lầm	Most conflicts arise from simple misunderstandings.	clear up misunderstanding, avoid misunderstanding, lead to misunderstanding
diplomatic approach	n. phrase	/ˌdɪpləˈmætɪk əˈprəʊtʃ/	cách tiếp cận khéo léo, ngoại giao	She used a diplomatic approach to address the issue.	take a diplomatic approach, require diplomatic approach
irreconcilable differences	n. phrase	/ˌɪrekənˈsaɪləbl ˈdɪfrənsɪz/	những khác biệt không thể hòa giải	They realized they had irreconcilable differences.	reach irreconcilable differences, overcome differences
face-to-face confrontation	n. phrase	/feɪs tə feɪs ˌkɒnfrʌnˈteɪʃn/	đối đầu trực tiếp	I prefer face-to-face confrontation over passive aggression.	avoid confrontation, engage in confrontation
amicable solution	n. phrase	/ˈæmɪkəbl səˈluːʃn/	giải pháp hòa bình, thỏa đáng	We worked together to find an amicable solution.	reach an amicable solution, seek an amicable solution
resentment	n.	/rɪˈzentmənt/	sự bực bội, oán giận	Unresolved issues can lead to deep resentment.	harbor resentment, build resentment, lingering resentment
facilitate dialogue	v. phrase	/fəˈsɪlɪteɪt ˈdaɪəlɒɡ/	tạo điều kiện đối thoại	My role was to facilitate dialogue between the parties.	help facilitate, effectively facilitate
bridge the gap	v. phrase	/brɪdʒ ðə ɡæp/	thu hẹp khoảng cách	We tried to bridge the gap in understanding.	attempt to bridge, successfully bridge the gap
constructive feedback	n. phrase	/kənˈstrʌktɪv ˈfiːdbæk/	phản hồi mang tính xây dựng	I provided constructive feedback rather than criticism.	give constructive feedback, receive constructive feedback
mutual respect	n. phrase	/ˈmjuːtʃuəl rɪˈspekt/	sự tôn trọng lẫn nhau	The resolution was built on mutual respect.	develop mutual respect, based on mutual respect

Idiomatic Expressions & Advanced Phrases

Cụm từ	Nghĩa	Ví dụ sử dụng	Band điểm
clear the air	làm sáng tỏ mọi chuyện, xua tan hiểu lầm	We needed to clear the air before continuing the project.	7.5-9
nip in the bud	ngăn chặn ngay từ đầu	It’s best to nip conflicts in the bud before they grow.	7.5-9
beat around the bush	nói vòng vo, không đi thẳng vào vấn đề	Instead of beating around the bush, I addressed the issue directly.	7-8
bury the hatchet	làm hòa, quên hận thù	After years of rivalry, they finally buried the hatchet.	7.5-8.5
reach an impasse	đi vào ngõ cụt (trong đàm phán)	The negotiations reached an impasse until I suggested a new approach.	8-9
take it with a grain of salt	không tin hoàn toàn, giữ thái độ hoài nghi	I took his accusations with a grain of salt and investigated further.	7.5-8.5
walk on eggshells	cẩn thận từng li từng tí (tránh làm ai đó nổi giận)	I was tired of walking on eggshells around him.	7-8
see eye to eye	đồng quan điểm	We didn’t always see eye to eye, but we found common ground.	7-7.5
at loggerheads	bất đồng gay gắt, tranh cãi	The two managers were constantly at loggerheads.	8-9
olive branch	cử chỉ hòa giải	I extended an olive branch by apologizing first.	7.5-8.5
blow over	(tình huống căng thẳng) qua đi, nguôi ngoai	I waited for the tension to blow over before discussing it.	7-7.5
bite your tongue	giữ im lặng (dù muốn nói)	I had to bite my tongue to avoid making things worse.	7-8
come to blows	đấm nhau, đánh nhau	The argument nearly came to blows before I intervened.	7.5-8
have a bone to pick	có vấn đề cần giải quyết với ai	She had a bone to pick with me about the deadline.	7.5-8
water under the bridge	chuyện đã qua, không đáng nhắc lại	We decided to treat it as water under the bridge and move on.	7.5-8.5

Discourse Markers (Từ Nối Ý Trong Speaking)

Để bắt đầu câu trả lời:

• 📝 Well,… – Dùng khi cần một chút thời gian suy nghĩ hoặc khi câu trả lời phức tạp
• 📝 Actually,… – Dùng khi muốn đưa ra góc nhìn khác hoặc correct một misunderstanding
• 📝 To be honest,… – Dùng khi nói thật, thường với personal opinion
• 📝 I’d say that… – Cách trang trọng để đưa ra quan điểm
• 📝 From my perspective,… – Nhấn mạnh đây là góc nhìn cá nhân
• 📝 In my experience,… – Dẫn dắt đến personal example

Để bổ sung ý:

• 📝 On top of that,… – Thêm vào đó, hơn nữa
• 📝 What’s more,… – Hơn thế nữa
• 📝 Not to mention… – Chưa kể đến
• 📝 Furthermore,… – Hơn nữa (formal hơn)
• 📝 Additionally,… – Thêm vào đó
• 📝 Moreover,… – Ngoài ra

Để đưa ra quan điểm cân bằng:

• 📝 On the one hand,… On the other hand,… – Một mặt… mặt khác
• 📝 While it’s true that…, we also need to consider… – Mặc dù đúng là… nhưng cũng cần xem xét
• 📝 That said,… – Tuy nhiên (formal)
• 📝 Having said that,… – Sau khi nói điều đó
• 📝 Conversely,… – Ngược lại
• 📝 By contrast,… – Trái lại

Để giải thích và elaboration:

• 📝 What I mean is… – Ý tôi là
• 📝 In other words,… – Nói cách khác
• 📝 To put it another way,… – Nói theo cách khác
• 📝 The thing is,… – Vấn đề là
• 📝 The point I’m making is… – Điểm tôi muốn nói là

Để kết luận:

• 📝 All in all,… – Tóm lại
• 📝 At the end of the day,… – Cuối cùng thì
• 📝 On balance,… – Xét cho cùng
• 📝 Taking everything into account,… – Xét tất cả mọi yếu tố
• 📝 To sum up,… – Tóm lại
• 📝 Ultimately,… – Cuối cùng

Trong quá trình giải quyết xung đột, việc giúp đỡ người khác tìm ra giải pháp cũng là một kỹ năng quan trọng. Bạn có thể tham khảo describe an experience where you helped someone solve a problem để làm phong phú thêm cách kể chuyện về những lần hỗ trợ người khác.

Grammatical Structures Ấn Tượng

1. Conditional Sentences (Câu điều kiện):

Mixed conditional (Type 2 + Type 3):

• Formula: If + Past Simple, would + Perfect Infinitive / If + Past Perfect, would + Infinitive
• Ví dụ: “If I were more experienced back then, I would have handled the situation differently” (Nếu lúc đó tôi có kinh nghiệm hơn, tôi đã xử lý tình huống khác đi)
• “If I had addressed the issue earlier, we wouldn’t be in this mess now” (Nếu tôi đã giải quyết vấn đề sớm hơn, chúng ta sẽ không ở trong tình trạng rối loạn này)

Inversion with conditionals:

• Formula: Had + subject + past participle / Were + subject + to-infinitive / Should + subject + infinitive
• Ví dụ: “Had I known about their disagreement earlier, I could have intervened” (Nếu tôi biết về bất đồng của họ sớm hơn, tôi đã có thể can thiệp)
• “Were the conflict to escalate further, we’d need external mediation” (Nếu xung đột leo thang hơn nữa, chúng ta sẽ cần trung gian từ bên ngoài)

2. Relative Clauses (Mệnh đề quan hệ):

Non-defining relative clauses:

• Formula: …, which/who/whose + clause, …
• Ví dụ: “My colleague, who had been with the company for ten years, was surprisingly open to compromise” (Đồng nghiệp của tôi, người đã làm việc cho công ty 10 năm, bất ngờ sẵn sàng thỏa hiệp)
• “The conflict, which had been brewing for months, finally came to a head during the meeting” (Xung đột, cái đã âm ỉ trong nhiều tháng, cuối cùng đã bùng nổ trong cuộc họp)

3. Passive Voice (Câu bị động):

Impersonal passive structures:

• It is thought/believed/said/considered that…: “It is widely believed that direct communication prevents conflicts from escalating” (Người ta tin rằng giao tiếp trực tiếp ngăn xung đột leo thang)
• Subject + is thought/believed/said to…: “Open dialogue is considered essential for conflict resolution” (Đối thoại cởi mở được coi là thiết yếu cho giải quyết xung đột)

4. Cleft Sentences (Câu chẻ):

What-cleft:

• Formula: What + subject + verb + is/was + focus
• Ví dụ: “What I found most challenging was maintaining neutrality while mediating” (Điều tôi thấy khó nhất là giữ trung lập khi hòa giải)
• “What really helped resolve the conflict was creating a safe space for dialogue” (Điều thực sự giúp giải quyết xung đột là tạo không gian an toàn cho đối thoại)

It-cleft:

• Formula: It + be + focus + that/who + clause
• Ví dụ: “It was their willingness to listen that made the resolution possible” (Chính sự sẵn sàng lắng nghe của họ đã làm cho giải pháp trở nên khả thi)

5. Participle Phrases (Cụm phân từ):

Present participle:

• Ví dụ: “Recognizing the tension, I decided to intervene before it escalated” (Nhận ra sự căng thẳng, tôi quyết định can thiệp trước khi nó leo thang)
• “Understanding both perspectives, I was able to facilitate a compromise” (Hiểu cả hai quan điểm, tôi có thể tạo điều kiện cho sự thỏa hiệp)

Perfect participle:

• Ví dụ: “Having experienced similar conflicts before, I knew how to approach the situation” (Sau khi trải qua những xung đột tương tự trước đó, tôi biết cách tiếp cận tình huống)

6. Nominalization (Danh từ hóa):

Chuyển động từ/tính từ thành danh từ để tăng tính academic:

• resolve → resolution: “The resolution of the conflict took several weeks” (Việc giải quyết xung đột mất vài tuần)
• communicate → communication: “Effective communication is key to preventing misunderstandings” (Giao tiếp hiệu quả là chìa khóa để ngăn hiểu lầm)
• differ → difference: “Their differences in working style led to frequent disagreements” (Sự khác biệt trong phong cách làm việc của họ dẫn đến bất đồng thường xuyên)

Sơ đồ từ vựng và cụm từ quan trọng về giải quyết xung đột trong IELTS Speaking

Chiến Lược Tổng Quát Để Đạt Band Cao

1. Preparation Strategy (Chiến Lược Chuẩn Bị)

Trước kỳ thi 4-6 tuần:

• Tạo personal story bank với 5-6 experiences thực tế về conflict resolution
• Luyện tập kể mỗi story trong 2-3 phút với timing
• Record và listen lại để identify hesitations và repetitions
• Build vocabulary notebook với collocations và examples

Trước kỳ thi 1-2 tuần:

• Practice với mock tests, focusing on fluency hơn accuracy
• Học thuộc 10-15 advanced expressions và practice sử dụng naturally
• Rehearse transitions giữa các ý để câu chuyện mạch lạc hơn
• Prepare flexible stories có thể adapt cho different cue cards

Ngày thi:

• Arrive 15 phút sớm để calm nerves
• Warm up bằng cách nói tiếng Anh với bản thân
• Trong waiting room, review key vocabulary mentally
• Remember: Examiner muốn bạn succeed, not fail

2. During The Test (Trong Phòng Thi)

Part 1:

• Smile và maintain eye contact để build rapport
• Extend answers beyond yes/no (aim for 2-3 sentences)
• Don’t memorize – sound natural và conversational
• Use signposting: “There are a couple of reasons…”

Part 2:

• Use full 1 minute preparation – jot down keywords only
• Follow cue card structure nhưng don’t be too rigid
• Aim for 2+ minutes – practice timing beforehand
• End with reflection/lesson learned để sound thoughtful
• If you run out before 2 minutes, expand với more details hoặc examples

Part 3:

• Take 2-3 seconds to think – it shows you’re considering the question
• Structure longer answers: Direct answer → Reason → Example → Nuance
• Use discourse markers để organize thoughts
• Acknowledge complexity: “It depends…”, “On the one hand…”
• Don’t be afraid to say “That’s an interesting question” để buy thinking time

3. Common Mistakes To Avoid (Lỗi Cần Tránh)

Về nội dung:

• ❌ Learning templates by heart – examiners detect this instantly
• ❌ Using vocabulary không phù hợp context
• ❌ Giving too short answers đặc biệt trong Part 3
• ❌ Going off-topic hoặc rambling without focus
• ❌ Using clichés như “Every coin has two sides”

Về cách nói:

• ❌ Speaking too fast do nervous
• ❌ Repeating same words/phrases nhiều lần
• ❌ Using too many fillers: “um”, “uh”, “like”
• ❌ Correcting yourself quá nhiều lần
• ❌ Apologizing for mistakes – just continue

Về thái độ:

• ❌ Being too formal và stiff
• ❌ Không eye contact với examiner
• ❌ Showing visible panic khi không hiểu câu hỏi
• ❌ Giving one-word answers khi nervous

4. How To Improve Each Band Descriptor

Fluency & Coherence:

• Practice speaking for 2 minutes without stopping
• Record yourself và identify where you hesitate
• Learn discourse markers và practice using naturally
• Tell stories to friends/family trong tiếng Anh

Lexical Resource:

• Build topic-specific vocabulary clusters
• Learn collocations, not just individual words
• Practice paraphrasing – say same idea differently
• Use idioms sparingly và only if natural

Grammatical Range & Accuracy:

• Master complex structures: conditionals, relative clauses, passives
• Self-correct major errors only, ignore minor slips
• Vary sentence length – mix simple và complex
• Practice thinking in English, not translating

Pronunciation:

• Focus on word stress hơn individual sounds
• Practice sentence stress và intonation patterns
• Record native speakers và mimic their rhythm
• Don’t worry about accent – clarity matters more

5. Exam Day Tips

Mental Preparation:

• Remember: It’s a conversation, not an interrogation
• Examiner wants you to do well – they’re not judging you as a person
• Small mistakes are okay – native speakers make them too
• Confidence shows through – believe in your preparation

Physical Preparation:

• Get good sleep night before
• Eat light breakfast/lunch – avoid heavy foods
• Stay hydrated nhưng don’t drink too much before test
• Dress comfortably – you need to feel relaxed

In The Exam Room:

• Treat examiner như a friendly acquaintance
• If you don’t understand question, ask: “Could you rephrase that?”
• If you make mistake, don’t dwell on it – move forward
• Use hands naturally when speaking – it’s okay to be animated
• Smile occasionally – it makes you sound more fluent

6. Post-Test Reflection

After the test:

• Note down questions bạn nhớ được
• Identify areas where bạn struggled
• Don’t overthink performance – it’s done
• If retaking, focus on specific weaknesses identified

Continuous Improvement:

• Join English speaking clubs hoặc online communities
• Watch English content với subtitles, then without
• Practice thinking in English throughout the day
• Find speaking partner để regular practice

---

Kết luận:

Chủ đề “describe a time when you successfully managed a conflict” là một topic quan trọng và thực tế trong IELTS Speaking. Để đạt band điểm cao, bạn cần:

1. Có story thực tế và chi tiết – avoid making up vague situations
2. Sử dụng sophisticated vocabulary naturally – không cần cố nhét từ khó
3. Structure câu trả lời logically – đặc biệt trong Part 3
4. Show depth of thinking – analyze, don’t just describe
5. Be fluent và confident – practice makes perfect

Hãy nhớ rằng IELTS Speaking đánh giá khả năng communicate effectively, không phải khả năng memorize perfectly. Focus vào expressing ideas clearly, developing them fully, và sounding natural. Với preparation đúng cách và practice thường xuyên, bạn hoàn toàn có thể đạt band điểm mục tiêu.

Chúc bạn thi tốt và tự tin trong phòng thi!