How can leaders resolve conflicts in Software Engineering?

As a leader I think it is important to do this step in such a way that avoids any level of finger-pointing. The aim here is to simply understand what the exact issue is and how it came to light. For example, in the situation of a technical disagreement you can take a step back to understand the problem we are trying to solve. By calculating the scale of the problem and what value we would get from a solution, it is then much easier to digest alternative views and see how they align to the desired outcomes / business goals.

To prevent bias while understanding the conflict, I typically ask the involved parties the *same* questions and listen to their responses without jumping to conclusions. To ensure they realize that you’ve heard them, do paraphrase your understanding of their point of view. It may also be helpful to get relevant perspectives from other team members.

When I have dealt with conflict (personal and technical), I’ve always found it useful to speak to the individuals involved separately. Obviously this depends on how volatile the situation is, but it can help ensure there are no opportunities for lost words which can often be the case when people talk over each other. By gathering information beforehand, you can then step into a facilitator mode in a well-armed state ready to test different sides of a story against each other. The other key element here is empathy. People have opinions because of their passion for something. Try to understand their reason for pushing their agenda vs others as it may hold a strong argument for accepting their case.

Often the conflicts seem to get resolved on the surface, but tad bit remains underneath making things worse over time. It is very important to monitor things and ensure that the conflict has not left any stains in the team's equation. Only a team that trusts each other can debate on the problems and solutions, without holding any grudges. To not hold grudges, leaders need to ensure conflicts get resolved in timely and appropriate manner.

Avoid a single meeting on a problem. Have two separate meetings. 1) Define the problem. Assures everyone understands the problem. This prevents people from jumping to suggestions before we agree on what the problem is. 2) Decide how to fix the problem. Gives people time to think about the problem before the solution meeting. This leads to more contributions and better ideas.

Encuentro necesario mencionar que la evasión del conflicto fue un paradigma de mediados del siglo pasado. Hoy en día está más que demostrado que el conflicto es inevitable y hasta necesario; así como la ansiedad, en pequeñas dosis y bien dirigido aporta a la dinámica en la oficina. ¿Cómo? Ayudando a la rotación entre equipos, sentando precedentes para futuros conflictos, aumentando la competitividad, disminuyendo tensión o visibilizando problemas comunes.