interests vs positions
Also called: interests and positions, interests before positions, underlying interests
A position is what someone says they want; an interest is the reason behind it (a need, worry or goal). Two opposite positions can often be resolved once the interests underneath are on the table.
A position is the solution someone has already chosen and asks for: "put me on shifts without him", "no late shifts", "I need two more people". An interest is the reason behind it: a need, a worry, a goal or a constraint. Positions are what people say first, and two of them often can't both be granted. Interests are rarely said out loud, and they overlap more often than the positions suggest.
The practical move is to ask about the reason before arguing about the request: "What would that give you?", "What are you worried will happen?", "What would a good outcome look like for you?" Then summarize what you heard, so the person can correct you. Once both people's interests are on the table, you can look for options that serve both, which a choice between two positions rarely does. A shared interest is the best starting point: it turns "me against you" into "us against the problem".
For a team lead this comes up in two places: mediating between two reports, and handling requests from your own manager or other teams. It doesn't promise a win-win answer every time. Sometimes interests really do clash, and someone has to decide, openly and on stated criteria. Even then the decision is better, and a "no" is easier to accept, when people can see their interest was understood.
Example
Mid-June 2027, Klasna's Support team. Bohdan leaves a public comment under Dmytro's reply: "A machine wrote this." Dmytro asks the lead to put him on shifts without Bohdan. Separate twenty-minute talks bring out what sits under each request:
The interest in speed is real: in the spring forecast, routine tickets were 2,465 of 5,140 (47.96%), and those are the ones an AI draft helps with. Splitting the shifts would grant Dmytro's position for the two weeks left on his contract and leave the real question, how the team uses the draft assistant, unanswered.
Options built on the interests: drafts for scheduling and package questions, refund replies written by hand; a short checklist before sending any draft; corrections by direct message, not in shared tickets. Each meets something both of them care about.
Common mistakes
- Treating the first request as the problem. Granting the ask can end the argument and leave its cause in place.
- Guessing interests instead of asking. Ask "what would that give you?" and summarize back until the person agrees.
- Assuming every conflict has a win-win answer. When interests really clash, someone decides, openly and on stated criteria.
- Hearing the senior or louder person first and longer. Give each person the same time; let the quieter one start.
- Bringing your own position into a mediation. There your job is the process, not the verdict.
Learn it in the course
- Mediating between two reports · Hear each side alone, look for interests behind positions, collect options before choosing, and know when not to mediate.
- Case: ticket ownership, Olha and Taras · One refund ticket, two answers to a family and two rules that both claim it. Find the structural cause, run the conversations and write the rule.