On February 26, 2026, our partner Danielle Farah Ziade moderated a conversation with Humberto Pires Terra Filho and Juliana Salvador on Conflict Governance: how corporate culture shapes dispute strategy, promoted by Canal Arbitragem.
The main points discussed during the conversation included:
“Culture does not only affect how you deal with conflict—it acts earlier, shaping how you want that relationship to unfold in the first place.”
Corporate culture is not merely what is written in manuals or policies; it is reflected in how decisions are made on a daily basis. It manifests even before any conflict arises, through the selection of clients, the choice of partners, and the intentions guiding the construction of business relationships, whether long-term or otherwise.
“The moment you define your ‘no’s’, you align behaviors around what you are not willing to accept.”
When leadership clearly establishes what the company will not tolerate and which risks it is not willing to assume, internal alignment follows. This alignment anticipates problems and reduces the likelihood of disputes. In other words, prevention begins long before the contract is signed.
“Conflict has a cost. It has a financial cost, but also emotional and reputational costs.”
In the infrastructure sector, the discussion highlighted that companies cannot focus solely on immediate profit. The logic is different: the business does not survive based only on the current project, but on the next one as well. For this reason, building trust-based relationships and maintaining an “open table” for dialogue are strategic factors for business continuity.
Another important topic was the role of technical documentation. Proper record-keeping should not be seen as “preparing for war,” but rather as a way to protect people, create institutional memory, and reduce subjectivity. Documentation should serve to organize and prevent conflicts, not to fuel them.
Finally, the conversation addressed how the future of conflict governance in infrastructure points toward disputes that are less adversarial and more actively managed throughout the life of the contract. There is a growing adoption of tools such as Dispute Boards, periodic settlement mechanisms, and multidisciplinary contract management that integrates technical and legal teams from the pre-engineering stage onward. The increasing sophistication of due diligence tools also plays a role in this shift: companies’ litigation histories are becoming more transparent, making reputation a decisive asset for participating in large-scale projects that require predictability and long-term partnerships.
A final reflection: in a market where reputation is a valuable asset, treating conflict as a management and learning tool is what distinguishes companies that truly thrive in the long term.
Access the full episode through the link: https://lnkd.in/dr2zEqTH.
