I often find myself helping people navigate interpersonal tension. I might hear from Alice about something that happened with Bob that upset her. It is important that Alice and Bob be able to work together so I need to help get things back on the right track.

There is a temptation in this scenario to just empathize with Alice. It is likely she has a legitimate grievance and if you just listen well and give her some encouragement you will have helped her. But this does little to repair the relationship with Bob or address the acute issue itself.

A stronger response would be to dig in. You go and meet with Bob where it is likely there is more to the story than you previously realized. Now you can decide who was right and hand down your verdict. The acute issue may be resolved now but you’ve likely increased the tension between the two of them and possibly also yourself.

The strongest way to handle this is to recognize that there is truth in each person’s narrative and insist that they consider that of the other. Here are the steps I take:

1/ Listen. Alice is obviously feeling wounded if she went out of her way to bring the issue up. It is healthy to make space for them to tell their story and show care for how it affected them.

2/ Steel Man. Challenge Alice to look past the specific actions and words Bob used which created the tension to see what value there might be in the substance. (Spoiler: there is always some substantial critique worth considering, or it is unlikely they would have said or done anything in the first place!)

3/ Flip the Script. I then go and meet with Bob, listen to his story, and force him to grapple with Alice’s perspective as a likely legitimate one that deserves to be understood and addressed.

4/ Reconnect. I encourage the two to meet directly and talk through the issue once more, ideally without involving me.

To give just a recent example, a new employee gave a harsh critique of one of the tools we have at the company. The engineer responsible for the tool was wounded by the tone and complained to me. I was sympathetic but I challenged them to look past that: was the substance of the critique valuable? Yes it was. I then went to the person who gave the critique and expressed my sympathy for a frustrating tool but challenged them to look past that: did they ever consider the tool was that way because the engineer couldn’t get the investment needed to make it better? No, they hadn’t really approached the critique with any curiosity.

I’ve done this so many times that I am now able to recognize this same duality inside myself. I will notice I am having an emotional reaction to something when it would be more productive to find the value in it.