How we resolve conflicts

At work we often get into heated debates on seemingly opposite ideas: 1. Monolith vs. MicroService 2. RDBMS vs. NoSQL 2. Tech Debt vs. Feature Development 3. CI/CD vs. Change Management that need manual approvals We are living in an age that people tend to hold polarized opinions: either “X” or “Y”; either “my way” or “high way”. I recently learned a model to divide the ways we resolve conflicts into three stages: Stage 1: like small kids people in this stage see things as black or white; right or wrong; good or evil. There is no middle way. It may sounds silly in this context but very often we hear comments like: “Micromanagement is evil” - sure we want to give you all the independence you need. But if you are new in a industry, or if you are fresh out of school, you may not even know how to write your first email to report your status. You will need very detailed coaching from someone, is that micromanaging? Stage 2: People in this stage understand between black and white there are a whole spectrum of light. They understand the truth is often in the middle; they learn to make compromise and trade off between opposing views. For example in an engineering team you will hear the manager announcing proudly “we will allocate 40% of our time on tech debts and operational excellence automations every sprint!” Great, but the manager is still seeing tech debt and feature development as two things that are conflicting each other, instead of one thing’s different perspectives. Stage 3: People in this stage see opposite views as different perspectives to look at a holistic system. Instead of just finding the middle way through compromises, they try to synthesize different ideas into new ideas that compensate each other, rather than conflicting each other. An engineering manager in this stage will see feature development and investment on operational excellence as different ways of delivering customer values. It is not about which gets 40% and which gets 60%. They select the work to invest on for a given time strategically to get the most return of investment. They connect the dots of small projects into a much bigger goal because to them, 1 + 1 >>> 2. “In Hegel's view, the process of history can be seen as a series of clashes between conflicting ideas or forces. These clashes are represented by the thesis and antithesis. The thesis is the original idea or concept, and the antithesis is the opposing idea or concept. The two opposing ideas or forces then enter into a struggle, leading to a period of conflict and tension. This process of conflict leads to the synthesis, which is a new and higher level of understanding that reconciles the thesis and antithesis. The synthesis, in turn, becomes a new thesis, leading to a new antithesis and another round of conflict and tension. This process continues until the final synthesis, which is a state of perfect harmony and understanding.”Activate to v