Conflict resolution diagram tutorial

15,358 views

Published on

Tutorial on how to use the Conflict Resolution Diagram. Presented by Portia Tung and Pascal Van Cauwenberghe at the Mini SPA conference, London, September 2010

Published in: Business
3 Comments
23 Likes
Statistics
Notes
No Downloads
Views
Total views
15,358
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3,153
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
882
Comments
3
Likes
23
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • 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.
  • Conflict resolution diagram tutorial

    1. 1. Resolving Conflicts without Compromisealso known as“I want to have my cake and eat it!”<br />Pascal Van Cauwenberghe & Portia Tung<br />
    2. 2. About us<br />Consultant.<br />Storyteller.<br />Games Maker.<br />Consultant. <br />Project Manager. <br />Games Maker.<br />His Blog: blog.nayima.be<br />Her Blog: www.selfishprogramming.org<br />NAYIMA<br />We make play work<br />
    3. 3. About this session<br />What do we mean by “Conflict” ?<br />Name a conflict you’d like to resolve<br />A conflict we prepared earlier<br />Patterns of Conflict<br />Ideas for resolving your conflict<br />Further reading<br />Session feedback<br />
    4. 4. 1/7What do we mean by conflict?<br />
    5. 5. “I want to live in the city...”<br />“... AND in the country”<br />
    6. 6. “I want to eat what I want...”<br />“... AND be fit and healthy”<br />
    7. 7. Manager: “We need to go faster <br />to deliver more features”<br />Developers: “We need to go slower <br />to increase quality.”<br />
    8. 8. What do we need to resolve conflicts?<br />Willingness to find a solution<br />Refuse to compromise <br />Common goal<br />Articulate the conflict<br />Explore solutions<br />Surface assumptions<br />Challenge assumptions<br />A dash of creativity<br />
    9. 9. The Shallow Thinking Process<br />A problem<br />Happy Days<br />Root Cause Analysis<br />THE Solution<br />This is what we <br />needed all along!<br />Why don’t we have <br />what we need?<br />Magic Happens Here<br />
    10. 10. The Logical Thinking Process<br />
    11. 11. The Logical Thinking Process<br />Intermediate Objectives Map<br />Prerequisite/<br />Transition Tree<br />How do we get there?<br />In small steps.<br />What is our goal?<br />What are we missing?<br />Future Reality Tree<br />Current Reality Tree<br />Would that work?<br />What could possibly go wrong?<br />Why don’t we have <br />what we need?<br />Magic Happens Here<br />That’s what this session is about<br />Conflict Resolution Diagram<br />What could be done to resolve the <br />underlying fundamental conflict?<br />
    12. 12. The Conflict Resolution Diagram<br />Prerequisite 1<br />Requirement 1<br />Objective<br />Requirement 2<br />Prerequisite 2<br />
    13. 13. 3 Types of Conflict<br />
    14. 14. Type 1:“I want X and the opposite of X”That’s not possible, is it?<br />“I want to live in the city...”<br />“... AND I want to live in the country”<br />
    15. 15. Type 2:“I want X and Y”But I have to choose, right?<br />“I want to eat what I want...”<br />“... AND be fit and healthy”<br />
    16. 16. Type 3:<br />“I want X. They want Y. We can’t both be right”<br />Only one of us can win, at best.<br />Developers: “We need to go slower <br />to increase quality.”<br />Manager: “We need to go faster <br />to deliver more features”<br />
    17. 17. 2/7 NAME a conflict you’d like to reSolve<br />
    18. 18. Three types of Conflict<br />I want X and the opposite of X<br />That’s not possible, is it?<br />I want X and Y but I can’t have both<br />I have to choose, don’t I?<br />I want X. They want Y.<br />Only one of us can win, at best.<br />
    19. 19. 3/7 Here’s one we prepared earlier<br />
    20. 20. Story #1<br />Consultants audited business unit => FAIL<br />We have to build a system to support the whole value stream<br />Conflicts between sales and operations<br />And between finance/audit and the rest<br />More than a month of “shuttle diplomacy”<br />
    21. 21. One of the conflicts is about product definition<br />Lots of confusion about what products mean<br />Ask 5 people, you get 6 different answers<br />2 previous attempts failed<br />We have a hard deadline because of new EU regulations<br />Story #1<br />
    22. 22. Step 1: Articulate the conflict<br />Prerequisite 1<br />Requirement 1<br />Objective<br />Requirement 2<br />Prerequisite 2<br />
    23. 23. Step 1: Articulate the conflict<br />Sales:<br />Customised <br />Products<br />Operations:<br />Standardised<br />Products<br />
    24. 24. Step 2: Find the common objective<br />Prerequisite 1<br />Requirement 1<br />Objective<br />Requirement 2<br />Prerequisite 2<br />
    25. 25. Tip: Don’t continue until you agree on a common, concrete and motivating goal<br />If there’s no common goal, there’s no incentive to solve the conflict<br />
    26. 26. Step 2: Find the common objective<br />Customised <br />Products<br />Sell more<br />Surviving<br />Business<br />Standardised<br />Products<br />Be more efficient<br />
    27. 27. Tip: Strive for clarity first,then for correctness<br />Precise and crisp definitions to ensure everyone has the same understanding<br />
    28. 28. Step 2: Find the common objective<br />Increase sales<br />Increase margin<br />Customised <br />Products<br />Profitability in a<br />shrinking market<br />Reduce costs<br />Deliver on SLA<br />Standardised<br />Products<br />
    29. 29. Step 3: Review clarity and logic<br />Increase sales<br />Increase margin<br />Customised <br />Products<br />Profitability in a<br />shrinking market<br />Reduce costs<br />Deliver on SLA<br />Standardised<br />Products<br />
    30. 30. Step 3: Find the assumptions<br />2<br />4<br />Prerequisite 1<br />Requirement 1<br />Objective<br />1<br />5<br />Requirement 2<br />Prerequisite 2<br />3<br />
    31. 31. Tip: Brainstorm assumptions<br />Go for quantity<br />Include “obvious” assumptions<br />
    32. 32. Tip: Use “Extreme Assumptions”aka “Throw a tantrum”<br />X is the ONLY way to have Y<br />X is the BEST way to have Y<br />X guarantees Y<br />
    33. 33. Step 3a: Find the assumptions<br />Increase sales<br />Increase margin<br />Customised <br />Products<br />1<br />Profitability in a<br />shrinking market<br />Reduce costs<br />Deliver on SLA<br />Standardised<br />Products<br />
    34. 34. 3a. Our assumptions<br />We can’t have both customised and standardised products because<br />Product == Product<br />Standardised != Customised<br />As soon as sales starts to customise we end up with an infinite number of products (again)<br />Sales doesn’t understand delivery<br />Operations doesn’t understand business<br />
    35. 35. Step 3: Find the assumptions<br />2<br />Increase sales<br />Increase margin<br />Customised <br />Products<br />Profitability in a<br />shrinking market<br />Reduce costs<br />Deliver on SLA<br />Standardised<br />Products<br />
    36. 36. 3b. Our assumptions<br />To increase sales and margin we need to customise products because<br />We can only compete by having an offer that’s different from our competitors<br />Customers are becoming more demanding<br />We must react quickly to customer demands<br />We can never compete on price<br />
    37. 37. Step 3: Find the assumptions<br />Increase sales<br />Increase margin<br />Customised <br />Products<br />Profitability in a<br />shrinking market<br />Reduce costs<br />Deliver on SLA<br />Standardised<br />Products<br />3<br />
    38. 38. 3c. Our assumptions<br />To reduce costs and deliver on SLA we need to standardise products because<br />Having low variation is the only way to have predictable production schedules<br />Standardised products are the only way to flexibly allocate people according to demand<br />Product variation always costs more (changeover, setups, switches, training, bottlenecks)<br />Lean only works with low variation production<br />
    39. 39. Step 3: Find the assumptions<br />4<br />Increase sales<br />Increase margin<br />Customised <br />Products<br />Profitability in a<br />shrinking market<br />Reduce costs<br />Deliver on SLA<br />Standardised<br />Products<br />
    40. 40. 3d. Our assumptions<br />To be profitable in a shrinking market we need to increase sales and margin because<br />We can’t expand the market<br />The only way to increase profitability is to sell more or increase the margin on each sale<br />
    41. 41. Step 3: Find the assumptions<br />Increase sales<br />Increase margin<br />Customised <br />Products<br />Profitability in a<br />shrinking market<br />5<br />Reduce costs<br />Deliver on SLA<br />Standardised<br />Products<br />
    42. 42. 3e. Our assumptions<br />To be profitable in a shrinking market we need to reduce costs and deliver on SLA because<br />We are penalised for not hitting SLAs<br />Our competitors have lower costs<br />This is a price sensitive market, so the only way to increase profitability is to reduce costs<br />This is a quality-sensitive market, so the only way to increase or keep market share is to increase quality<br />Quality is hitting the SLA<br />
    43. 43. Step 4: Challenge the assumptions<br />2<br />4<br />Prerequisite 1<br />Requirement 1<br />Objective<br />1<br />5<br />Requirement 2<br />Prerequisite 2<br />3<br />
    44. 44. Step 4: Challenge the assumptions<br />2<br />4<br />Increase sales<br />Increase margin<br />Customised <br />Products<br />1<br />Profitability in a<br />shrinking market<br />5<br />Reduce costs<br />Deliver on SLA<br />Standardised<br />Products<br />3<br />
    45. 45. 4a. Challenge our assumptions<br />We can’t have both customised and standardised products because<br />Product == Product<br />Standardised != customised<br />As soon as sales starts to customise we end up with an infinite number of products (again)<br />Sales doesn’t understand delivery<br />Operations doesn’t understand business<br />
    46. 46. 4b. Challenge our assumptions<br />To increase sales and margin we need to customise products because<br />We can only compete by having an offer that’s different from our competitors<br />We must react quickly to market demands<br />We can never compete on price<br />
    47. 47. 4c. Challenge our assumptions<br />To reduce costs and deliver on SLA we need to standardise products because<br />Having low variation is the only way to have predictable production schedules<br />Standardised products are the only way to flexibly allocate people according to demand<br />Product variation always costs more (changeover, setups, switches, training, bottlenecks)<br />Lean only works with low variation production<br />
    48. 48. 4d. Challenge our assumptions<br />To be profitable in a shrinking market we need to increase sales and margin because<br />We can’t expand the market<br />The only way to increase profitability is to sell more or increase the margin on each sale<br />
    49. 49. 4e. Challenge our assumptions<br />To be profitable in a shrinking market we need to reduce costs and deliver on SLA because<br />We are penalised for not hitting SLAs<br />Our competitors have lower costs<br />This is a price sensitive market, so the only way to increase profitability is to reduce costs<br />This is a quality-sensitive market, so the only way to increase or keep market share is to increase quality<br />Quality is hitting the SLA<br />
    50. 50. The assumption we challenged<br />Increase sales<br />Increase margin<br />Customised <br />Products<br />Profitability in a<br />shrinking market<br />Product == Product<br />Reduce costs<br />Deliver on SLA<br />Standardised<br />Products<br />
    51. 51. What if....<br />Sales and Operations were talking about different products?<br />That would explain the confusion<br />
    52. 52. The resolved conflict<br />Customise <br />Sales<br />Product<br />Increase sales<br />Increase margin<br />Profitability in a<br />shrinking market<br />Sales Product != Operational Product<br />Standardise<br />Operational <br />Product<br />Reduce costs<br />Deliver on SLA<br />
    53. 53. There was another conflict<br />Operations:<br />Coarse <br />Products<br />Low input and<br />tracking<br />overhead<br />Lower costs<br />Reduce cycle<br />time<br />How would you solve this conflict?<br />Finance & audit:<br />Detailed<br />Products<br />Detailed auditing<br />Cost analysis<br />
    54. 54. The Solution<br />Finance & Audit<br />“Products”<br />Operations<br />“Products”<br />Sales & Marketing<br />“Products”<br />
    55. 55. The Result<br />Built and deployed the system<br />Took two years, including refactoring of product catalog<br />Business unit has been profitable since<br />Market share grows<br />Among top 5 in the world meeting industry SLAs<br />Continuously improving<br />
    56. 56. 4/7 patterns of conflicT<br />
    57. 57. Three types of Conflict<br />I need X and the opposite of X<br />That’s not possible, is it?<br />I need X and Y but I can’t have both<br />I have to choose, don’t I?<br />I want X. They want Y. We can’t both be right<br />Only one of us can win, at best.<br />
    58. 58. Using the Conflict Resolution Diagram<br />You can’t solve your own conflict<br />Ask for help<br />The biggest obstacle is willingness to find a solution without compromise<br />Need to believe that a solution exists<br />Use examples to show that solving the problem is possible<br />First look for clarity, then for correctness<br />A clear problem statement often leads to “evaporation” of the problem<br />The CRD is a collaborative tool<br /> Don’t use it to “prove” the other party is wrong<br />Sometimes you have to provide “shuttle diplomacy”<br />
    59. 59. Typical conflict patterns<br />The false conflict<br />We’re talking about different things<br />Assuming we have no options<br />We always have options<br />Today against tomorrow<br />We can repay debt in small steps<br />Not enough resources<br />There are ways to do more with the same resources<br />Conflating means and ends<br />There’s another way to achieve the goal<br />
    60. 60. 5/7 Did you get any ideas to look at your conflicts differently?<br />
    61. 61. 6/7 further reading<br />
    62. 62. Recommended Resources<br />Summary from www.agilecoach.net<br />“The Logical Thinking Process” – H.W. Dettmer<br />“It’s not Luck” – E. Goldratt<br />“Thinking in Systems” – D. Meadows<br />
    63. 63. Summary<br />
    64. 64. About this session<br />What do we mean by “Conflict” ?<br />Name a conflict you’d like to resolve<br />A conflict we prepared earlier<br />Patterns of Conflict<br />Ideas for resolving your conflict<br />Further reading<br />Session feedback<br />
    65. 65. Three types of Conflict<br />I need X and the opposite of X<br />That’s not possible, is it?<br />I need X and Y but I can’t have both<br />I have to choose, don’t I?<br />I want X. They want Y. We can’t both be right<br />Only one of us can win, at best.<br />
    66. 66. What do we need to resolve conflicts?<br />Willingness to find a solution<br />Refuse to compromise <br />Common goal<br />Articulate the conflict<br />Explore solutions<br />Surface assumptions<br />Challenge assumptions<br />A dash of creativity<br />
    67. 67. The Shallow Thinking Process<br />A problem<br />Happy Days<br />Root Cause Analysis<br />THE Solution<br />This is what we <br />needed all along!<br />Why don’t we have <br />what we need?<br />Magic Happens Here<br />
    68. 68. The Logical Thinking Process<br />Intermediate Objectives Map<br />Prerequisite/<br />Transition Tree<br />How do we get there?<br />In small steps.<br />What is our goal?<br />What are we missing?<br />Future Reality Tree<br />Current Reality Tree<br />Would that work?<br />What could possibly go wrong?<br />Why don’t we have <br />what we need?<br />Magic Happens Here<br />Conflict Resolution Diagram<br />What could be done to resolve the <br />underlying fundamental conflict?<br />
    69. 69. The Conflict Resolution Diagram<br />Articulate the conflict<br />Find the common objective<br />Review clarity and logic<br />Find the assumptions<br />Challenge the assumptions<br />Explore potential solutions<br />
    70. 70. We can have our cake AND eat it!<br />
    71. 71. 7/7 Session feedback<br />
    72. 72. Session Retro<br />Thank You!<br />for your Gift of Feedback<br />
    73. 73. Thank you!<br />Introductions<br />Consultant.<br />Storyteller.<br />Games Maker.<br />Consultant. <br />Project Manager. <br />Games Maker.<br />His Blog: blog.nayima.be<br />Her Blog: www.selfishprogramming.org<br />NAYIMA<br />We make play work<br />

    ×