Two Things

Leaders often see tension between two people as a problem to fix, but the most effective approach is to treat each narrative as containing truth and use a four-step process that restores collaboration. First, listen fully to the upset party, creating space for their story and emotions. Then steel-man their perspective, forcing them to extract any substantive critique hidden behind the tone. Next, flip the script by meeting the other person, listening to their view, and making them grapple with the first party's legitimate concerns. Finally, reconnect the two directly so they can resolve the issue without a manager as the go-between.

The article illustrates this with Alice and Bob. Alice brings a grievance; a leader might be tempted to only empathize with her, but that leaves Bob's side unaddressed. By steel-manning Alice, the leader uncovers the underlying value in her complaint. Meeting Bob and forcing him to consider Alice's viewpoint creates a shared understanding, and the leader then steps back, encouraging a direct conversation.

A second example shows how the same pattern applies to technical feedback. A new employee harshly critiques a tool, wounding the responsible engineer. The leader listens to the engineer's feelings, then steel-mans the critique to see its substance. Turning to the critic, the leader acknowledges the tone but asks if the criticism uncovers a deeper investment gap. This shifts the dialogue from personal offense to systemic improvement.

Repeatedly applying this duality lets leaders recognize their own emotional reactions and convert them into productive curiosity. By treating every conflict as an opportunity to surface hidden value, leaders keep teams focused on improvement rather than lingering resentment.