Background: The effective management of conflicts with aggressive potential is of outmost importance, particularly in clinical settings where power relations are asymmetrical and emotional stakes are high. This is especially true for psychiatric settings where interpersonal relations are a key component in treatment. In most studies to date the risk of aggressive behaviour by patients has been the focus of attention. Most research has shown that many instances of aggressive behaviour are preceded by interactions between staff members and patients.Thus,in this study we have looked at aggressive dispositions and conflict management strategies in the therapeutic personnel of the Psychiatric University Hospital Zurich. Methods: In the present study we assessed the psychiatric nursing staff of the Psychiatric University Hospital Zurich with a collection of standardised questionnaires with respect to their current living situation, their work-related cognitive and behavioural patterns (AVEM) and their disposition for aggressive behaviour (FAF). Additionally we applied the Giessen Test (GT), a standardised personality test and a questionnaire for the assessment of conflict resolution strategies (FKBS). Results: The return rate was relatively low (total 40.6%, psychiatric nursing staff 42.7%) but judged to be sufficient for analysis. Our results show that staff members view themselves as markedly less aggressive than average. Furthermore, a substantially higher percentage of the staff shows a work-related pattern indicative of conservation (in comparison to a German reference population), i.e. the work-related ambitions are lower than average while distancing oneself from work-related problems and inner tranquillity or sereneness are markedly more pronounced (AVEM). At the same time they recur to more mature coping strategies, i.e. intellectualisation or reaction formation. We have explored the relations between these different dimensions and found that the above-mentioned more mature conflict resolution strategies are strongly associated with lower levels of aggression while projection or turning against self or others (more immature strategies) are associated with higher levels. In fact, they turn out to be the most important factors (among the assessed) in predicting the overall level of aggressive disposition Conclusion: The substandard scores in both AVEM and FAF came to us partly, if not entirely, unexpectedly. An additional possibly qualitative investigation will be necessary to clarify the meaning and implications of this result. The association between the conflict resolution strategies and the level of overall aggressive disposition on the other hand seems quite straightforward. The development of these strategies within a professional framework however, and accordingly the introduction of factors that stimulate or enhance positive conflict resolution strategies in psychiatric settings will have to be explored in more detail. The implications for staff training are discussed.