1. Resolving Conflicts without Compromise
also known as
“I want to have my cake and eat it!”
Pascal Van Cauwenberghe & Portia Tung
2. About us
Her Blog: www.selfishprogramming.org His Blog: blog.nayima.be
NAYIMAWe make play work
Consultant.
Storyteller.
Games Maker. Consultant.
Project Manager.
Games Maker.
3. About this session
1. What do we mean by “Conflict” ?
2. Name a conflict you’d like to resolve
3. A conflict we prepared earlier
4. Patterns of Conflict
5. Ideas for resolving your conflict
6. Further reading
7. Session feedback
5. “I want to live in the city...” “... AND in the country”
6. “I want to eat what I want...” “... AND be fit and healthy”
7. Manager: “We need to go faster
to deliver more features”
Developers: “We need to go slower
to increase quality.”
8. What do we need to resolve conflicts?
1. Willingness to find a solution
– Refuse to compromise
– Common goal
2. Articulate the conflict
3. Explore solutions
– Surface assumptions
– Challenge assumptions
– A dash of creativity
9. The Shallow Thinking Process
Root Cause
Analysis
Why don’t we have
what we need?
A problem
Magic
Happens
Here
THE Solution
This is what we
needed all along!
Happy
Days
11. The Logical Thinking Process
Intermediate
Objectives
Map
Current
Reality Tree
Conflict
Resolution
Diagram
Future Reality
Tree
Prerequisite/
Transition
Tree
What is our goal?
What are we missing?
Why don’t we have
what we need?
What could be done to resolve the
underlying fundamental conflict?
Would that work?
What could possibly go wrong?
How do we get there?
In small steps.
Magic
Happens
Here
That’s what
this session is
about
14. “I want to live in the city...” “... AND I want to live in the country”
Type 1:
“I want X and the opposite of X”
That’s not possible, is it?
15. “I want to eat what I want...” “... AND be fit and
healthy”
Type 2:
“I want X and Y”
But I have to choose, right?
16. Manager: “We need to go faster
to deliver more features”
Developers: “We need to go slower
to increase quality.”
Type 3:
“I want X. They want Y. We can’t both be right”
Only one of us can win, at best.
18. Three types of Conflict
1. I want X and the opposite of X
That’s not possible, is it?
2. I want X and Y but I can’t have both
I have to choose, don’t I?
3. I want X. They want Y.
Only one of us can win, at best.
20. Define
products
Sales Operations Billing Invoicing
Story #1
• Consultants audited business unit => FAIL
• We have to build a system to support the
whole value stream
• Conflicts between sales and operations
• And between finance/audit and the rest
– More than a month of “shuttle diplomacy”
21. • One of the conflicts is about product
definition
• Lots of confusion about what products mean
– Ask 5 people, you get 6 different answers
• 2 previous attempts failed
• We have a hard deadline because of new EU
regulations
Story #1
24. Step 2: Find the common objective
Objective
Prerequisite 1Requirement 1
Prerequisite 2Requirement 2
25. Tip: Don’t continue until you agree
on a common, concrete and
motivating goal
If there’s no common goal, there’s no
incentive to solve the conflict
26. Step 2: Find the common objective
Sell more
Be more efficient
Customised
Products
Standardised
Products
Surviving
Business
27. Tip: Strive for clarity first,
then for correctness
Precise and crisp definitions to
ensure everyone has the same
understanding
28. Step 2: Find the common objective
Increase sales
Increase margin
Reduce costs
Deliver on SLA
Customised
Products
Standardised
Products
Profitability in a
shrinking market
29. Step 3: Review clarity and logic
Increase sales
Increase margin
Reduce costs
Deliver on SLA
Customised
Products
Standardised
Products
Profitability in a
shrinking market
32. Tip: Use “Extreme Assumptions”
aka “Throw a tantrum”
X is the ONLY way to have Y
X is the BEST way to have Y
X guarantees Y
33. Step 3a: Find the assumptions
1
Increase sales
Increase margin
Reduce costs
Deliver on SLA
Customised
Products
Standardised
Products
Profitability in a
shrinking market
34. 3a. Our assumptions
• We can’t have both customised and
standardised products because
– Product == Product
– Standardised != Customised
– As soon as sales starts to customise we end up
with an infinite number of products (again)
– Sales doesn’t understand delivery
– Operations doesn’t understand business
35. Step 3: Find the assumptions
2
Increase sales
Increase margin
Reduce costs
Deliver on SLA
Customised
Products
Standardised
Products
Profitability in a
shrinking market
36. 3b. Our assumptions
• To increase sales and margin we need to
customise products because
– We can only compete by having an offer that’s
different from our competitors
– Customers are becoming more demanding
– We must react quickly to customer demands
– We can never compete on price
37. Step 3: Find the assumptions
3
Increase sales
Increase margin
Reduce costs
Deliver on SLA
Customised
Products
Standardised
Products
Profitability in a
shrinking market
38. 3c. Our assumptions
• To reduce costs and deliver on SLA we need to
standardise products because
– Having low variation is the only way to have
predictable production schedules
– Standardised products are the only way to flexibly
allocate people according to demand
– Product variation always costs more
(changeover, setups, switches, training, bottleneck
s)
– Lean only works with low variation production
39. Step 3: Find the assumptions
4
Increase sales
Increase margin
Reduce costs
Deliver on SLA
Customised
Products
Standardised
Products
Profitability in a
shrinking market
40. 3d. Our assumptions
• To be profitable in a shrinking market we need
to increase sales and margin because
– We can’t expand the market
– The only way to increase profitability is to sell
more or increase the margin on each sale
41. Step 3: Find the assumptions
5
Increase sales
Increase margin
Reduce costs
Deliver on SLA
Customised
Products
Standardised
Products
Profitability in a
shrinking market
42. 3e. Our assumptions
• To be profitable in a shrinking market we need
to reduce costs and deliver on SLA because
– We are penalised for not hitting SLAs
– Our competitors have lower costs
– This is a price sensitive market, so the only way to
increase profitability is to reduce costs
– This is a quality-sensitive market, so the only way
to increase or keep market share is to increase
quality
– Quality is hitting the SLA
44. Step 4: Challenge the assumptions
1
2
3
5
4
Increase sales
Increase margin
Reduce costs
Deliver on SLA
Customised
Products
Standardised
Products
Profitability in a
shrinking market
45. 4a. Challenge our assumptions
• We can’t have both customised and
standardised products because
– Product == Product
– Standardised != customised
– As soon as sales starts to customise we end up
with an infinite number of products (again)
– Sales doesn’t understand delivery
– Operations doesn’t understand business
46. 4b. Challenge our assumptions
• To increase sales and margin we need to
customise products because
– We can only compete by having an offer that’s
different from our competitors
– We must react quickly to market demands
– We can never compete on price
47. 4c. Challenge our assumptions
• To reduce costs and deliver on SLA we need to
standardise products because
– Having low variation is the only way to have
predictable production schedules
– Standardised products are the only way to flexibly
allocate people according to demand
– Product variation always costs more
(changeover, setups, switches, training, bottleneck
s)
– Lean only works with low variation production
48. 4d. Challenge our assumptions
• To be profitable in a shrinking market we need
to increase sales and margin because
– We can’t expand the market
– The only way to increase profitability is to sell
more or increase the margin on each sale
49. 4e. Challenge our assumptions
• To be profitable in a shrinking market we need
to reduce costs and deliver on SLA because
– We are penalised for not hitting SLAs
– Our competitors have lower costs
– This is a price sensitive market, so the only way to
increase profitability is to reduce costs
– This is a quality-sensitive market, so the only way
to increase or keep market share is to increase
quality
– Quality is hitting the SLA
50. The assumption we challenged
Product ==
Product
Increase sales
Increase margin
Reduce costs
Deliver on SLA
Customised
Products
Standardised
Products
Profitability in a
shrinking market
51. What if....
Sales and Operations were talking
about different products?
That would explain the confusion
53. There was another conflict
Operations:
Coarse
Products
Finance & audit:
Detailed
Products
Low input and
tracking
overhead
Detailed auditing
Cost analysis
Lower costs
Reduce cycle
time
How would you solve this conflict?
55. The Result
• Built and deployed the system
– Took two years, including refactoring of product
catalog
• Business unit has been profitable since
• Market share grows
• Among top 5 in the world meeting industry
SLAs
• Continuously improving
57. Three types of Conflict
1. I need X and the opposite of X
That’s not possible, is it?
2. I need X and Y but I can’t have both
I have to choose, don’t I?
3. I want X. They want Y. We can’t both be right
Only one of us can win, at best.
58. Using the Conflict Resolution Diagram
• You can’t solve your own conflict
– Ask for help
• The biggest obstacle is willingness to find a solution
without compromise
– Need to believe that a solution exists
– Use examples to show that solving the problem is possible
• First look for clarity, then for correctness
– A clear problem statement often leads to “evaporation” of
the problem
• The CRD is a collaborative tool
– Don’t use it to “prove” the other party is wrong
– Sometimes you have to provide “shuttle diplomacy”
59. Typical conflict patterns
• The false conflict
– We’re talking about different things
• Assuming we have no options
– We always have options
• Today against tomorrow
– We can repay debt in small steps
• Not enough resources
– There are ways to do more with the same resources
• Conflating means and ends
– There’s another way to achieve the goal
60. 5/7 DID YOU GET ANY IDEAS TO LOOK
AT YOUR CONFLICTS DIFFERENTLY?
62. Recommended Resources
• Summary from www.agilecoach.net
• “The Logical Thinking Process” – H.W. Dettmer
• “It’s not Luck” – E. Goldratt
• “Thinking in Systems” – D. Meadows
64. About this session
1. What do we mean by “Conflict” ?
2. Name a conflict you’d like to resolve
3. A conflict we prepared earlier
4. Patterns of Conflict
5. Ideas for resolving your conflict
6. Further reading
7. Session feedback
65. Three types of Conflict
1. I need X and the opposite of X
That’s not possible, is it?
2. I need X and Y but I can’t have both
I have to choose, don’t I?
3. I want X. They want Y. We can’t both be right
Only one of us can win, at best.
66. What do we need to resolve conflicts?
1. Willingness to find a solution
– Refuse to compromise
– Common goal
2. Articulate the conflict
3. Explore solutions
– Surface assumptions
– Challenge assumptions
– A dash of creativity
67. The Shallow Thinking Process
Root Cause
Analysis
Why don’t we have
what we need?
A problem
Magic
Happens
Here
THE Solution
This is what we
needed all along!
Happy
Days
68. The Logical Thinking Process
Intermediate
Objectives
Map
Current
Reality Tree
Conflict
Resolution
Diagram
Future Reality
Tree
Prerequisite/
Transition
Tree
What is our goal?
What are we missing?
Why don’t we have
what we need?
What could be done to resolve the
underlying fundamental conflict?
Would that work?
What could possibly go wrong?
How do we get there?
In small steps.
Magic
Happens
Here
69. The Conflict Resolution Diagram
1. Articulate the conflict
2. Find the common objective
3. Review clarity and logic
4. Find the assumptions
5. Challenge the assumptions
6. Explore potential solutions
Objective
Prerequisite1Requirement1
Prerequisite2Requirement2
1
2
3
5
4
72. Session Retro
What Went Well (WWW) What Went Wrong (WWW)
Puzzles Lessons Learned
Thank You!
for your Gift of Feedback
73. Thank you!
Introductions
Her Blog: www.selfishprogramming.org His Blog: blog.nayima.be
NAYIMAWe make play work
Consultant.
Storyteller.
Games Maker. Consultant.
Project Manager.
Games Maker.
Editor's Notes
Portia and Pascal introduce themselves by sharing a bit about their background.
Pascal: Maybe this is too negative?This is how I used to think: whenever there’s a problem, we’ll do a root cause analysis, some magic happens and we come up with a breakthrough solution that suddenly solves all problems. Applause!Of course, it never worked that way. Except in movies.
But then I learned about a better way of thinking
To do root cause analysis, we use the Current Reality Tree.Before you can analyse what you miss, you must know what you what (isn’t there a song like “You can’t have what you want unless you know what you want” ?). That’s why we use the IO mapAfter the magic happens and we come up with a solution, we use the future reality tree to “test drive” the idea, to see if it works and to see what undesired side effects we might generate.Then we find a way to implement the solution in small steps.The magic happens with the CRD tool. It’s a step by step approach to understand the fundamental conflicts that underlie the root cause and to find the real breakthrough solutions.
TODO: redraw so that titles are correct
TODO: add images
TODO: redraw so that titles are correct
What is the conflict about?Sales says that we should offer more customised products. Ideally, we would have a different product for every customer, perfectly tailored to to their needs- Operations thinks that’s madness. The way forward is to standardise products. Today’s system is a complete mess with lots of little variations in the work. How can you expect
Once we’ve articulated the conflict, we need to find out why we need those two things.We read this diagram as To have objective, we need Requirement 1 and 2. To have Requirement ½ we need prerequisite ½
TODO: redraw so that titles are correct
TODO: redraw so that titles are correct
TODO: redraw so that titles are correct
TODO: redraw so that titles are correct
TODO: redraw so that titles are correct
Maybe over 3 slides (1, 2 and 3, 4 and 5)
TODO: redraw so that titles are correct
Maybe over 3 slides (1, 2 and 3, 4 and 5)
TODO: redraw so that titles are correct
Maybe over 3 slides (1, 2 and 3, 4 and 5)
TODO: redraw so that titles are correct
Maybe over 3 slides (1, 2 and 3, 4 and 5)
TODO: redraw so that titles are correct
Maybe over 3 slides (1, 2 and 3, 4 and 5)
TODO: redraw so that titles are correct
TODO: redraw so that titles are correct
Maybe over 3 slides (1, 2 and 3, 4 and 5)
Maybe over 3 slides (1, 2 and 3, 4 and 5)
Maybe over 3 slides (1, 2 and 3, 4 and 5)
Maybe over 3 slides (1, 2 and 3, 4 and 5)
Maybe over 3 slides (1, 2 and 3, 4 and 5)
TODO: add images
TODO: add images
Pascal: Maybe this is too negative?This is how I used to think: whenever there’s a problem, we’ll do a root cause analysis, some magic happens and we come up with a breakthrough solution that suddenly solves all problems. Applause!Of course, it never worked that way. Except in movies.
To do root cause analysis, we use the Current Reality Tree.Before you can analyse what you miss, you must know what you what (isn’t there a song like “You can’t have what you want unless you know what you want” ?). That’s why we use the IO mapAfter the magic happens and we come up with a solution, we use the future reality tree to “test drive” the idea, to see if it works and to see what undesired side effects we might generate.Then we find a way to implement the solution in small steps.The magic happens with the CRD tool. It’s a step by step approach to understand the fundamental conflicts that underlie the root cause and to find the real breakthrough solutions.
TODO: redraw so that titles are correct
We are constantly striving to improve. Give your Gift of Feedback by completing a session retrospective.Everyone take a sheet of paper. Split it into 4 quadrants.In the top left quadrant, note down all the things that went well.In the top right quadrant, note down all the things that went wrong.In the bottom left quadrant, note down your puzzles such as outstanding questions you have as a result of the attending the session.In the bottom right quadrant, note down your lessons learned.