In stakeholder conflicts during change projects, I’ve learned that political awareness and understanding power, relationships, and unspoken interests is key. A few actions: 1- Map Influence Early: Identify who holds power, their priorities, and potential friction points. 2- Leverage Trusted Allies: Align with respected stakeholders to subtly influence resistant parties. 3- Listen for Hidden Agendas: Avoid direct confrontation but address underlying concerns by reframing solutions to align with their interests. 4- Neutrality is Strength: Stay impartial being seen as fair builds credibility, even when navigating tricky dynamics.

In my opinion:7 Strategies to Handle and Resolve Conflicts 1) Determine if the problem is worth discussing. 2) Use the right body language. 3) Focus on the facts not personal opinions. 4) Allow everyone to speak. 5) Be mindful of the language you use. 6) Approach the problem with empathy. 7) Refocus the conversation on solutions.

First step is to understand if it is the project *causing* the conflict or if it is simply the trigger to wider issues. If the former then you can rationally understand their different points of view and what is the source of the conflict. If there are broader issues it may be that you need to see what to do about those before you can hope for alignment on the change project.

Identify the Root Cause of the Conflict Is it due to misaligned priorities, resource constraints, fear of change, or lack of communication? Meet with stakeholders separately to understand their concerns and expectations. 2. Foster Open & Transparent Communication Organize a neutral, structured discussion where each stakeholder can voice their concerns. Use active listening to ensure they feel heard and valued. Summarize key points to confirm understanding: “If I understand correctly, your concern is…” 3. Find Common Ground Align discussions with the shared goal of the project’s success. Highlight mutual benefits and how the change supports business objectives.

In one change project, two key stakeholders were at odds—one prioritized speed, the other insisted on thorough testing. Meetings were tense, and progress stalled. Instead of choosing sides, I brought them together for a structured discussion, focusing not on their positions but on the shared risk of failure if they didn’t align. We reframed the debate into a joint problem-solving session, where each side proposed solutions rather than defending their stance. This shift turned the conflict into collaboration. By ensuring everyone felt heard and valued, we reached a compromise that balanced both priorities, moving the project forward without lingering resentment.