There’s a question that comes up in just about every product interview that goes something like, “Tell me about a time you disagreed with an engineer, and how you resolved it.”
I have a simple answer to this question - in the teams that I work in, we ‘engineer’ conflict every day between design, engineering and product. Being comfortable in disagreement is what prevents micro conflicts from blowing up into macro conflicts, which is what that interview question is trying to get at.
Most people are not comfortable with conflict (they want to be in the tribe, and all of that). It’s much easier to agree, or say you agree, and move on without the awkwardness of not agreeing.
But constant consensus leads to poor decision making, usually because one person ends up making all of the key decisions. Short of being a solopreneur, I can’t think of a circumstance where one person has enough context, perspective or experience to make every decision (and even then…).
There are a few approaches that I’ve found are helpful to set an expectation that you’re open to disagreement:
When I start working with someone new, I let them know I want them to have an opinion on our product, and to express it
I frame almost everything I say as ‘I think…’ rather than something more concrete
After expressing an opinion, I will explicitly ask for disagreement / opinions on where I’m wrong
Write a document and share it for comment; this somehow feels less personal than oral disagreement
Being able to operate in conflict is a sign of a team that has trust in and respect for each other, and in my experience, teams with those qualities are usually the ones performing at the highest level.