4.6 Conflict and missed commitments

Disagreement is normal in analytical work. Team members may reasonably disagree about definitions, methods, interpretations, or priorities. The goal is not to prevent disagreement but to resolve it using evidence and agreed procedures.

A practical response sequence is:

1. describe the issue using observable facts;
2. distinguish the work problem from assumptions about a person’s motives;
3. hear each person’s understanding of the cause;
4. restate the shared project goal and relevant charter rule;
5. compare possible solutions and their consequences;
6. agree on a specific action, owner, and follow-up date; and
7. escalate when the team cannot resolve the issue or project integrity is at risk.

Escalation should not be used to avoid ordinary discussion. It is appropriate when the team lacks authority, confidentiality may be affected, a repeated problem threatens delivery, or an unresolved disagreement could materially change the result.

Quality standard: A collaboration process should protect respectful communication while still addressing recurring non-performance, unreliable work, and threats to project quality.