The theory of constraints suggests that there is an underlying conflict behind why a system stays as it is. The root cause isn’t removed because it is seen as integral to how the world works. There is perhaps a compromise or accepted way of doing things which are thought to always be there, and focus is therefore directed elsewhere and workarounds become standard practice.

Whether we are aiming to resolve the tension of reward vs risk or trying to balance customer vs business needs, Goldratt states that a solution is available which is a win for both sides, not just a compromise. The tool he brings is the Conflict Resolution Cloud, sometimes called an Evaporating Conflict Cloud.

A Personal Conflict

I am going to illustrate the resolution process using a personal conflict. Recently Netflix released a TV show in the UK called “Floor Is Lava”. The show is an obstacle based competition featuring teams playing the childhood game at an exaggerated level. This is something my youngest child, who is 8, would love to watch; the whole family would like to watch it together.

“Where is the conflict?” you might ask. The problem is that my youngest daughter tends to have boundless energy which she struggles to contain without bouncing on furniture. My wife and I are concerned that she would get wound up by the show and end up in trouble through replicating what she saw. It’s not fair of us to wind her up and then discipline her, so we need to address this conflict.

Expressing the conflict

Conflict is not necessarily about animosity, but rather two mutually exclusive positions. We cannot both watch Floor is Lava and also not watch Floor is Lava. It is this conflict we want to resolve.

First, we ask what are the needs which we address by either of these actions. For “watching” we are addressing the need to enjoy time together; for “not watching” we are addressing the need to avoid our child getting into trouble.

Next, we look at what common purpose both these needs serve. In our case, it is that we have a harmonious and enjoyable family life.

The arrangement of these items forms the basis of the cloud:

Examining the conflict

The links show which elements conflict with one another, and the logical connections to the needs and overall shared purpose. Usually, the main focus is on the links between the conflicting “wants” and the identified “needs”. This is because when we draw the diagram we show that the conflict does not exist between the underlying needs or their common purpose.

If we examine the assumptions behind the links between the conflicting wants and their respective needs, we can identify a way to have both of the “needs” through one option or the other, or even a third way. This is how we get true win-win solutions and no compromise.

Fortunately for us, we have used the Yani books (written by Kathy and John Suerken as part of their TOC for education resources ) to familiarise our daughter with the system thinking tools. The first book, Yani’s goal covers clouds, and this enabled us to work through this with our daughter. The sequel to the Goal, It’s not luck also introduces this process in resolving a parental concern, around lending a car.

We checked with our daughter ensure she agreed with our assessment. We then outlined the assumptions on the links. First, because it is our preferred option, the link between watching and having fun:

She agreed with each assumption, although she did point out that “Floor is Lava will be exciting and adventurous” was not certain, as we hadn’t watched the show yet, so this may not be true.

Next, we examined the assumptions on the less favourable side, Not watching to avoid getting into trouble:

Again she pointed out that the first assumption is not proven; otherwise, she accepted that the energy, excitement and potential for trouble were legitimate. It ultimately boiled down to avoid getting into trouble and avoiding getting hurt.

Breaking the conflict

We can examine other links and the assumptions to see if they are valid and seek ways to address them, but in this case, we were satisfied we had enough to work with. The full cloud is as follows:

The first way we could break the conflict was to “Find other TV shows to watch together as a family”. This removes the problem, but still provides the need which “watching” was to provide, that is, “To have fun together”. This is one effective way of resolving the conflict, by finding a way to meet the needs whilst taking the other action.

Needless to say, this was not our daughter’s preferred solution. She suggested we look at how getting into trouble and getting hurt may happen:

Getting Into Trouble:

• Copying the show
• Breaking things
• Risky actions around items that cannot be replaced

Getting Hurt:

• Falling onto or banging into something
• Jumping onto something sharp

We agreed they covered the primary concerns we had, and if we could find ways to address these concerns, then the assumption that these would happen if we watched the show would be broken.

Her suggestions were:

• Avoid watching when restless or over-excited
• Go outside after watching the show to calm down
• Don’t watch before bed
• Recognise that it is not permitted to copy the show
• Do not climb on things in the house
• Play energetic games outside or in a gym

The Result

We were satisfied that our daughter had fully grasped and addressed our concerns with watching the show and would follow the guidelines we had mapped out and found a time to watch the show.

As a result, we confirmed one of our prior uncertain assumptions, Floor is Lava was found to be both exciting and adventurous; it also contained activities not to be repeated at home. More importantly, we did have a lot of fun together, even with our oldest daughter, no-one was in trouble, and the harmony of family life was maintained.

There could be a lot more at stake when dealing with a conflicting circumstance, so we can take our ideas to resolve the conflict, and work forward to see what effects they may have, this is what we will look at next time.