Team members are at odds over critical technical solutions. How can you bridge the gap and find a resolution?

Se faz necessário abrir o diálogo, algumas vezes até mesmo individualmente para n?o trazer rixa para dentro da equipe e n?o os dividir. Muitas vezes o que acontece é que um profissional mais experiente se fecha e n?o abre a mente, mas, por outro lado, um profissional menos experiente por n?o tem muita habilidade pode tender a chutar respostas, o que acaba atrapalhando. O gestor, nem sempre entende amplamente de tudo, alguns inclusive acabam caindo de paraquedas no depto, entretanto, ele será o melhor mediador do conflito, p?r os problemas em mesa e analisar cada caso. As vezes o mais experiente pode ter raz?o ou n?o, ou talvez o menos experiente pode ter a raz?o, n?o é porque inexperiente que n?o entenda.

Initiate a comprehensive assessment of the conflict by conducting both individual and group consultations with the team members involved. Endeavor to understand each individual's perspective, their underlying motivations, and the specific technical issues at hand. Document these insights to ensure a thorough understanding of the conflict's genesis. Employ active listening techniques to validate their concerns, creating an environment where team members feel comfortable sharing their viewpoints without fear of judgment.

Define and communicate clear, shared objectives that are directly aligned with the overarching project goals. Convene a meeting to ensure all team members understand the significance and relevance of these objectives to the project's success. Emphasize the common goals and demonstrate how resolving the conflict will facilitate achieving these goals. Utilize the SMART criteria (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound) to ensure the objectives are precise and attainable.

Facilitate a structured ideation session to explore a broad spectrum of potential technical solutions. Encourage team members to present their ideas in an open forum, free from initial criticism. Once a comprehensive list of alternatives has been compiled, guide the team through a meticulous discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of each option. Employ analytical tools such as SWOT analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) to rigorously evaluate the feasibility, impact, and risks associated with each alternative.

Create a scoring system to evaluate each option against the criteria. This could be a simple scale (e.g., 1-5) or a more complex system depending on the needs of the project.

Develop a detailed decision-making framework outlining specific criteria for evaluating the proposed technical solutions. These criteria should encompass factors such as technical feasibility, cost-effectiveness, scalability, risk assessment, resource availability, and alignment with the project's strategic objectives. Ensure the framework is transparent and has the consensus of all team members. Utilize decision-making tools such as weighted scoring models or decision matrices to objectively compare and rank the alternatives based on the established criteria.

Strive to achieve consensus by thoroughly considering the feedback and insights from the team. Select the solution that best meets the established criteria and aligns with the shared objectives. Clearly articulate the decision-making process and the rationale behind the chosen solution to ensure transparency and garner buy-in from all team members. Develop a detailed implementation plan outlining the steps, timelines, and responsibilities for executing the chosen solution.