# Where conflicts come from > Look for the cause in roles, shared resources, goals and metrics before personalities, and pick a response that fits the situation. - 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 21/32, ~24 min - Source: https://productovi.com/courses/from-specialist-to-manager/where-conflicts-come-from ## Where we are **Alex Tutor:** June 2027, your sixth month leading Klasna's Support team. The spring exam peak is winding down, and Dmytro and Sofiia, the two seasonal coordinators, finish at the end of the month. **Alex Tutor:** This month is about pressure: conflict, overload and the conversations they call for. Today: where conflicts come from. ## A clash in the team chat **Sofia:** Taras and Maryna sniped at each other in the team chat again. He wrote "some of us actually close tickets", she replied "and some of us get them back". Is it just personalities? **Alex Tutor:** Maybe. But check the setup first. Most conflicts at work grow out of how the work is arranged: **roles** that overlap, **shared resources**, **goals** that pull apart and **metrics** that reward different things. **Alex Tutor:** That's a **structural conflict**. Talk to people about their attitude and it returns next week. Change the setup and it often fades on its own. **Olha:** Can I add something? When a family reopens one of Taras's tickets, it goes back to the shared queue. Whoever is on shift picks it up, and most evenings that's Maryna. **Alex Tutor:** There's your structure. Taras closes and moves on; the rework lands on someone else. Each of them sees the other's behavior, not the rule behind it. > **Exercise:** Match each Support-team conflict to its **structural source**. ## Task or relationship? **Sofia:** But they really do disagree about the work: fast replies versus careful ones. Isn't some conflict healthy for a team? **Alex Tutor:** That part is **task conflict**: disagreement about the work itself. **Relationship conflict** is personal friction: tone, blame, "some of us". **Alex Tutor:** The two rarely stay apart. A dispute about speed turns personal fast, especially in writing. Disagreeing about the work helps mainly when trust is high and the talk stays on the work. **Alex Tutor:** So don't stir up arguments to sharpen the team. Make it safe to disagree about the work, and keep the jabs out. > **Exercise:** **True or false:** conflict about the task itself always improves a team's results, so a lead should encourage it. ## Five ways to respond **Alex Tutor:** When a conflict lands on you, there are five basic responses: **hold** your position, **give way**, **step back** for now, **split the difference**, or **look for a solution together** around both sides' needs. **Alex Tutor:** They are choices for a situation, not personality types. Nobody is "an avoider" by nature. **Alex Tutor:** Insist when safety, the law or a customer's money is at stake. Give way when it matters far more to them than to you. Step back while tempers are hot. Split when time is short. Solve together when the issue keeps coming back. **Sofia:** And the reopened tickets? **Alex Tutor:** They come back every week: solve that together, don't just rule on it. **Alex Tutor:** Match each situation with the response that fits it. > **Exercise:** Match each situation with the response that fits it best. > **Exercise:** On the team call, Taras proposes skipping the identity check on refund requests "just during the peak" to reply faster. Which response fits best? ## Remote makes it louder **Alex Tutor:** In a remote team, most conflict happens in writing. Text loses tone, and a public thread gives everyone an audience. **Alex Tutor:** Three habits help: move a heated thread to a call, talk to each person separately before any joint talk, and never rule on who's right in the team channel. **Alex Tutor:** The argument heats up in a thread. What's your first move? > **Exercise:** Taras and Maryna's exchange in the team chat is getting sharper, with the whole team reading. What's the lead's best first move? **Iryna:** Before you fix anything, tell me: is this a people problem I should know about, or a setup problem you can fix yourself? **Alex Tutor:** Answer that with evidence. Look for a pattern: does the clash follow a rule, a queue or a number? Then it's the setup. > **Exercise:** Which signs point to a **structural** cause rather than to personalities? Choose all that apply. ## A fix you can test **Alex Tutor:** You could talk to Taras about care and to Maryna about tone. Or you could change the rule. **Sofia:** A few ideas: reopened tickets go back to whoever closed them; a reopen counter per person on the team dashboard; or no evening shifts for Taras. **Alex Tutor:** Test each against the source. Which one changes who carries the rework, without naming and shaming anyone? **Olha:** And whatever you pick, tell them both before it shows up in the chat. Nobody likes reading about their own problem in a team announcement. > **Exercise:** Taras and Maryna keep sniping at each other in the team chat. When a family reopens one of Taras's tickets, it goes back to the shared queue, and most evenings Maryna picks it up. Which change addresses the **structural** source of their clash? **Alex Tutor:** One more check before you roll it out. > **Exercise:** **True or false:** once you've found a structural fix, the fastest and fairest move is to announce it in the team channel straight away. ## Your answer to Iryna **Alex Tutor:** Before the rule changes, talk to Taras and Maryna separately. Each should hear it from you first, with the reason. **Alex Tutor:** Then try it for two weeks and check two things: how many tickets come back, and how many reopens Maryna still picks up in the evening. **Iryna:** Send me four lines: what's behind the clash, your evidence, the change, and how you'll know it worked. **Alex Tutor:** Keep it about the setup. If you catch yourself writing an adjective about a person, swap it for a fact. > **Exercise:** Taras and Maryna keep sniping at each other in the team chat. When a family reopens one of Taras's tickets, it goes back to the shared queue, and most evenings Maryna picks it up. Write Iryna **four lines**: the structural source of the Taras and Maryna clash, the evidence, the change you'll try, and how you'll check it worked. > **Key ideas** > > - Before personalities, check the setup: **overlapping roles**, **shared resources**, **goals** that pull apart and **metrics** that reward one side. That's a **structural conflict**, and changing the setup usually helps more than a talk about attitude. > - **Task conflict** (about the work) and **relationship conflict** (personal friction) often travel together; disagreement about the work helps mainly when trust is high and the talk stays on the work. > - Five responses (insist, give way, step back, split the difference, solve together) are choices for a situation, not personality types. > - Remote teams: move heated threads to a call, talk to each person separately first, never rule on who's right in the team channel. > - Prefer a reversible change you can test for two weeks, and say up front how you'll check it. **Alex Tutor:** Next time: when two people are already dug in, how to sit between them and help them find their own way out. - Previous lesson: [Case: the 90-minute stand-up](https://productovi.com/courses/from-specialist-to-manager/the-90-minute-stand-up-case.md) - Next lesson: [Mediating between two reports](https://productovi.com/courses/from-specialist-to-manager/mediating-between-two-reports.md) --- Productovi Learning. Free, no sign-up needed to read.