# Mediating between two reports > Hear each side alone, look for interests behind positions, collect options before choosing, and know when not to mediate. - Course: [From Specialist to Manager: Your First Year Leading a Team](https://productovi.com/courses/from-specialist-to-manager.md) - Module: Conflict and pressure - Lesson 22/32, ~24 min - Source: https://productovi.com/courses/from-specialist-to-manager/mediating-between-two-reports ## Two positions **Alex Tutor:** Mid-June. Under one of Dmytro's replies in a shared ticket, Bohdan left a comment: "A machine wrote this." An hour later Dmytro messaged you: "Can you put me on shifts without Bohdan?" **Sofia:** Simplest fix: separate their shifts. Two weeks and Dmytro's contract ends anyway. **Alex Tutor:** The quarrel is about how the team uses the AI draft assistant, and that question stays after Dmytro leaves. Separate shifts would hide it, not settle it. **Alex Tutor:** This is a case for **mediation**: you hear each person alone, then bring them together around the shared problem, and they find the next step themselves. **Alex Tutor:** Before the method: why not just separate their shifts? > **Exercise:** Dmytro asks for shifts without Bohdan, and his contract ends in two weeks anyway. Why is separating their shifts a weak fix? **Alex Tutor:** Start by separating **interests and positions**. "Shifts without Bohdan" is a position: what someone says they want. The interest is the reason underneath: a need, a worry, a goal. **Olha:** For what it's worth, Bohdan isn't against Dmytro. Last month an AI draft promised a family a refund outside the policy, and Bohdan was the one who had to call them back. > **Exercise:** Which of these statements are **interests** rather than positions? Choose all that apply. ## Separate talks first **Alex Tutor:** Talk to each of them alone first, about twenty minutes on a call. Ask what happened, what matters to them, what they'd need. Listen, summarize back, and don't judge or promise anything yet. **Sofia:** Dmytro said: "Without the drafts I'm twice as slow. And his comments are public." Bohdan said: "I'm not his teacher, but I won't let a family be lied to." **Alex Tutor:** Now you have a shared interest to build on: both want families to get correct answers without long waits. That becomes the problem you put on the table together. **Alex Tutor:** Mind the imbalance: ten years in the field against three months. Agree the rules up front, give each the same time, and speak to the quieter one first. **Alex Tutor:** Check how you'd run those separate talks. > **Exercise:** Under one of Dmytro's AI-drafted replies in a shared ticket, Bohdan wrote "A machine wrote this.", and Dmytro asked for shifts without Bohdan. In your 20-minute separate talk with Dmytro, which approach is best? > **Exercise:** Put the steps of a mediation between two reports in order. ## Options before choices **Alex Tutor:** In the joint talk, don't let the first idea win. Ask for at least three options before anyone weighs them. **Alex Tutor:** They might suggest: AI drafts allowed for scheduling and package questions, refund replies written by hand; Bohdan reviews Dmytro's refund replies privately for two weeks; a short checklist before sending any draft; comments by direct message, not in shared tickets. **Alex Tutor:** Then choose against criteria both accept: correct for families, fast enough for the queue, nobody corrected in public. **Iryna:** Do you want me to step in? I'd rather you handle it. But anything that changes the refund policy, or the assistant's rules for the whole team, comes to me. **Alex Tutor:** Back in the joint talk, the first idea is already on the table. What now? > **Exercise:** You are mediating between Dmytro and Bohdan about how the team uses AI drafts. Ten minutes into the joint call, Dmytro suggests: "Let's just say Bohdan checks all my replies." Bohdan shrugs. What's the best next move? > **Exercise:** You are mediating between Dmytro and Bohdan about how the team uses the AI draft assistant. Halfway through the joint call, Bohdan says: "That assistant is garbage, full stop." What is the best next move? ## When not to mediate **Alex Tutor:** Mediation fits two people with a work disagreement who can both speak freely. Some situations aren't that. **Alex Tutor:** Harassment, threats, discrimination, anything about safety or the law: don't mediate. Record the facts, protect the person who raised it, and take it to Iryna the same day. **Alex Tutor:** If one person is afraid of the other, keep the talks separate and escalate. If someone shows signs of a health crisis, point them to professional help. And you can't mediate a conflict you're part of: ask Iryna or a neutral colleague. **Alex Tutor:** Last, if the clash comes from the setup, mediate and fix the rule too. Here, nobody owns the team's rules for the AI assistant. > **Exercise:** Which situations should the lead **not** handle with mediation alone? Choose all that apply. ## Remote, and in writing **Alex Tutor:** Remote mediation works. Hold the joint talk on video, cameras optional, never in a team thread. **Alex Tutor:** Afterwards, send both a short written summary: what you agreed, who does what, when you'll check. Each confirms in writing, and you follow up privately a week later. **Sofia:** And if they can't agree? **Alex Tutor:** Say so up front: "If you two don't agree by Friday, I'll decide, and here's how." That isn't a threat. It's honest about who decides. > **Exercise:** **True or false:** in a remote team, the joint mediation talk should happen in the team channel, so everything is transparent. ## Open the joint call **Alex Tutor:** The first two minutes set the tone. Name the shared problem, not the culprit. Set two ground rules. Then invite Dmytro to start. **Sofia:** So no "you two need to get along"? **Alex Tutor:** Right. Start with the families and the work, not the friction. The friction gets easier once both feel heard. **Alex Tutor:** And keep your own view of the assistant out of the opening. In this call your job is the process, not the verdict. > **Exercise:** Under one of Dmytro's AI-drafted replies in a shared ticket, Bohdan wrote "A machine wrote this.", and Dmytro asked for shifts without Bohdan. Both want families to get correct answers without long waits. Write the **opening of the joint call** with Bohdan and Dmytro (3–5 sentences): the shared problem, two ground rules, and how you hand over to the first speaker. > **Key ideas** > > - **Mediation**: hear each person alone, then bring both together around a shared problem, and let them find the next step themselves. > - Separate **interests and positions**: "shifts without Bohdan" is a position; not being shamed in public and keeping up while learning are interests. Shared interests are the starting point. > - Steps: separate talks → ground rules → shared problem → each restates the other → options without judging → choose by criteria both accept → written agreement with a review date. > - Balance experience and voice: same time for each, the quieter person first. > - Don't mediate harassment, threats, discrimination, safety or legal issues, fear of the other person, or a conflict you're part of: record, protect, escalate; point to professional help when health is at stake. > - Remote: a private video call, a written summary both confirm, a follow-up a week later. Say in advance who decides if they can't agree. **Alex Tutor:** Next: when the pressure isn't between two people but on all of them. Overload, burnout, and what a lead can actually change. - Previous lesson: [Where conflicts come from](https://productovi.com/courses/from-specialist-to-manager/where-conflicts-come-from.md) - Next lesson: [Overload and burnout](https://productovi.com/courses/from-specialist-to-manager/overload-and-burnout.md) --- Productovi Learning. Free, no sign-up needed to read.