Organisational conflicts, such as workplace bullying and sexual harassment, represent an area of deep concern for organisations on a Global scale. The primary aim of most organisations is to minimise any such conflicts through containment measures that keep the issues in-house. Since the 1930s, several workplace changes have contributed to a tightening-up of containment measures through an emphasis on individuals and individual responsibility in organisations. However, this over emphasis on the interpersonal aspects of a conflict can deflect attention from other factors that play a role and can result in the issue escalating and/or re-emerging and causing ongoing and potentially costly problems. A sociological analysis of public cases of organisational conflict, using Luc Boltanski’s affair model (process) and Pierre Bourdieu’s field theory (power relations) has revealed that factors, such as prior histories and the affiliations used by the protagonists to defend their position, are often overlooked. Not only can this contribute to the re-emergence of the problem/s, but may also result in the conflict becoming a public affair. The case of Brodie Panlock, a young Victorian woman who committed suicide after being subjected to workplace bullying(2006) and the sexual harassment case of Kristy FraserKirk, a junior publicist for David Jones, who claimed she was sexually harassed by the CEO Mark McInnes (2010), are both examined here to highlight some of these factors. To address organisational conflict effectively, the focus must move beyond personal accounts and superficial measures, which focus on protagonists to explore all contributing factors.