Tim came to me in a 1on1 and asked me to handle it: Someone on another team had upset one of his people, and he wanted me to talk to that manager and make it right. Sometimes a manager tells me in a 1on1 that I should talk to someone, because they misbehaved, or because they feel like someone didn't treat them right. They then want me to tell the other person their behavior isn’t acceptable and that they maybe should apologize, or even talk about consequences of that misbehavior…
In the past I did as they wished. I would follow reporting lines and tell the other manager they should talk to their guy. Suddenly because one guy felt mistreated 4 people were busy. I did that and thought it was right as I had to "protect" my people.
But by packing those managers in bubble wrap nobody learned anything. The guy that misbehaved got a warning or a message from his manager that he shouldn’t do that anymore, the guy that complained didn’t learn to engage in real conflict, and the two managers in the middle felt important but wasted their time with playing kindergardener.
I also avoided the conflict there, because I didn’t want to tell a softer manager to solve the problem on his own. I didn’t wanna engage in the conflict myself - so I said I will take care.
Somehow it was clear to me that I was being the bottleneck there, so I usually told people to solve their stuff directly. But I didn’t have a principle or truth I could connect “solve it yourself” to, and why that matters.
I listened to a podcast where two people hosted a retreat and they discussed their learnings, and one of those was "You can never be part of the problem".
When the weather sucks or something bad is happening, you have to be the motivated, good-willing guy that works on a solution or helps people see the good and the reality, or tells people upfront that this is what it is.
In my leadership philosophy I often talk about "being a manager is like being the host of a party" — you make sure people have everything they need to have a good time, they know where to get what and whom to talk to. The connection to this hosting principle was there in an instant.
A manager under no circumstances can be part of a problem.
If he wants the "retreat" or "party" to move on, he has to get out of his own way. That doesn't mean being a punching bag for anyone. It means regulating your emotions and taking the first step towards a solution, even if uncomfortable or they don't feel like talking to that one person.
If hell breaks loose and there is an incident or "the party" is threatened, it's a manager's job to remain calm and not starting blaming people. It's the manager's job to minimize damage and get the party started again.
There are so many matching stories that fit this analogy.
When A doesn’t want to talk to B, if B is a manager, B has to make the first step.
And again, this has nothing to do with being a punching bag. It has to do with making the first step, naming a problem, and proposing a solution without listening to your fears, your pride, your ego.
Managers are there to build bridges.
And that also requires being ready and able to give good feedback.
It requires a manager to speak up when he sees something is wrong and also the willingness to address that directly.
That requires him or her to get uncomfortable and to risk conflict, and also to know when it may be necessary to conflict and whom to pull in.
How to get good at that?
Monitor your level of fear and resistance. Whenever you feel resistance or discomfort in a conversation, that's a signal — something is there to push through, not around.
Nobody is born good at conflict. Ask your manager how they'd handle it. Practice in low-stakes 1on1s — have those conversations, dig a little deeper than feels comfortable. That's how it stops feeling like a threat.
Feedback can be a tool to either help start a conflict, or to keep it small and resolve it quicker if done right and done in the right situation.
But it can also be the catalyst to push someone out of their comfort zone to start a bigger conflict - which can be necessary to resolve a situation.
In general, if conflicts aren't settled or don't surface, they build communication debt — every avoided conversation is a bill that compounds. Similar to technical debt, they create layers of bad decisions that become harder and harder to resolve the longer they exist (or remain unsurfaced).
Therefore, conflicts are necessary for progress.
Avoiding them is not a strategy.
Letting them surface and go through them together is.
Back to my managers asking me to solve their issues…
I realized that I am no different. When some conflict with them came up, I crumbled. I didn't go deeper, because I knew it’s freaking uncomfortable.
When I realized that I was in a transition phase from that manager that would freeze as I had gotten feedback recently and I was sure to work on that feedback of not giving enough direction and also not being demanding or guiding enough in some areas.
I had written down the manager version I want to be, and that was that I’ll speak the truth even if it gets uncomfortable and that it’s my job to even go into uncomfortable territory and that I can’t be part of the problem.
I realized there was tension in that manager when he told me that. I already wanted to say I’ll take care, but I decided this time to ask why he doesn’t talk to that other guy himself.
And a conflict between us emerged. I realized the same way he had been avoiding conflict with others, I have been avoiding the conflict with him to push him outside of this comfort zone.
This started a couple of tough weeks as we had to go through lot of painful moments together where he AND I had to make some confessions on what we missed to address and missed to learn.
But both of us came out of it with something more valuable than a resolved situation. We learned that conflict avoided doesn't disappear, it piles up and creates bigger problems later. Going through it together made our relationship stronger, not weaker. And Tim became noticeably better at stepping into difficult conversations with his own team.
Conflict is not the enemy. Avoided conflict is.