It’s an EOS quarterly offsite, and the leadership team is gathered to set their next 90-day Rocks—the priorities that will drive the company forward toward its one-year plan. However, they find themselves fighting over strategies instead of addressing real business needs.
In today’s fast-paced business environment, many teams find themselves fighting over strategies rather than addressing core challenges. The implications of fighting over strategies can lead to unnecessary conflicts and hinder effective decision-making. By recognizing the tendency to engage in battles over strategies, teams can refocus their efforts on identifying and meeting the fundamental needs of the organization.
At the center of the discussion are two key leaders with opposing viewpoints:
- Alex, a Maverick (CEO) – The visionary, always pushing for the next big move. His Predictive Index (PI) profile thrives on autonomy, speed, and market leadership.
- Megan, an Analyzer (COO) – The process-driven strategist, focused on efficiency, structure, and risk management. Her PI profile values stability, precision, and measured execution.
Alex wants to launch a new product expansion into an untapped market, seeing it as the bold move that will help them outpace competitors. Megan pushes back.
- “We’re still fixing the inefficiencies from the last rollout,” she says. “If we don’t stabilize first, we’ll create even more operational breakdowns.”
- “If we don’t take action now, we’ll miss our window of opportunity,” Alex counters. “Other companies are already moving into this space.”
This conflict highlights how teams can get sidetracked by internal debates, ultimately fighting over strategies rather than focusing on execution and results.
They aren’t actually disagreeing on the company’s ultimate goal—they both want sustainable growth. But they’re debating how to get there, each believing their strategy is the best path forward.
This is one of the biggest sources of conflict in leadership teams: confusing strategies with needs.
The cycle of fighting over strategies can create a toxic environment, where team members feel undervalued and unheard. Instead of fighting over strategies, it is crucial to prioritize open communication and collaboration to foster a healthier team dynamic.
Addressing the issue of fighting over strategies requires a shift in mindset. When leaders commit to exploring all potential strategies in a constructive manner, they can turn these conflicts into opportunities for innovation and growth.
Ultimately, understanding that fighting over strategies is often rooted in deeper needs can lead to more effective collaboration and better outcomes for the organization. Leaders must guide their teams to navigate these discussions with empathy and clarity.
The Beacon Partners Approach: Transforming Leadership Conflict into Clarity
At The Beacon Partners, we’ve helped dozens of companies resolve leadership conflict by differentiating needs from strategies. Many leadership teams, like Alex and Megan’s, mistakenly assume they are fighting over business direction when they are really stuck debating competing strategies to meet the same needs.
By shifting focus from fighting over strategies to addressing the actual needs at stake, teams can pave the way for sustainable solutions that benefit the entire organization.
By helping teams:
- Differentiate between business and individual needs
- Use The Predictive Index to understand each leader’s needs and motivators
- Practice listening first to each team member’s underlying needs to strengthen trust before debating strategies
- Utilize their EOS toolkit to structure productive discussions
… we’ve seen leadership teams replace frustration with clarity, reduce wasted time in meetings, and improve execution.
In This Article, You’ll Learn How To:
- Identify the difference between needs and strategies
- Use Predictive Index to anticipate team conflicts before they escalate
- Apply EOS tools to align your leadership team and commit to the best strategies for the business
Why Leadership Teams Get Stuck in Strategy Battles
Every business has fundamental needs—growth, efficiency, stability, and innovation. These are non-negotiable for long-term success.
But each leader brings their own lens to the table, shaped by their role, experience, and personality:
- Alex’s Needs: Forward momentum, innovation, and market leadership.
- Megan’s Needs: Structure, operational clarity, and risk management.
Their conflict isn’t about the company’s needs—it’s about the strategy to fulfill those needs.
The more Alex pushes for innovation, the more Megan digs into stabilization first. Instead of recognizing that there are multiple possible strategies to meet the same need, they each get locked into defending their own approach.
This is where The Five Dysfunctions of a Team becomes relevant. Debating strategies are necessary for a healthy team dynamic, but only if the debate is built on trust and clarity and does not devolve into fighting over strategies.
To have healthy conflict, leadership teams need to recognize when they are fighting over strategies rather than working collaboratively to fulfill the organization’s needs. This awareness can transform conflicts into productive discussions that lead to innovative solutions.
1. Clarity on the company’s needs (so everyone knows what problem they’re solving).
2. Clarity on each leader’s personal needs and motivators (so differences don’t feel like personal attacks).
3. A commitment to listening first (so that even if one strategy is chosen over another, everyone feels heard and valued).
Understanding Needs vs. Strategies
Marshall Rosenberg’s Nonviolent Communication (NVC) framework helps clarify this dynamic:
- Needs are universal. They are the real drivers of decision-making.
- Strategies are the methods used to meet those needs. There are often multiple strategies that could effectively satisfy the same need.
In Business, This Means:
- The need for stability might lead one leader to push for a cost-cutting strategy, while another suggests a client retention strategy to ensure revenue consistency.
- The need for efficiency might drive one leader to advocate for an automation strategy, while another prefers a process improvement strategy to enhance workflow.
- The need for innovation might lead one leader to focus on a new product launch strategy, while another sees a brand repositioning strategy as the best way to stand out.
The core problem that leads to fighting over strategies?
Leaders often assume their strategy is the only way to meet the company’s needs, instead of first aligning on the need itself and then exploring multiple strategic options.
How Predictive Index Helps Teams Avoid Fighting Over Strategies
One of the most powerful ways to prevent leadership misalignment is to understand each team member’s unique needs and motivations.
The Predictive Index (PI) provides insight into how each leader naturally approaches business decisions. By knowing the PI profiles on your leadership team, you can anticipate conflicts before they escalate and structure conversations that align personal and business needs.
Overview of Four Common Predictive Index Profiles in Leadership
- Maverick (Alex, CEO) – Bold, big-picture thinkers who push for rapid growth and change.
- Needs: Autonomy, Innovation, Impact
- Analyzer (Megan, COO) – Methodical problem solvers who prioritize data, structure, and risk reduction.
- Needs: Clarity, Precision, Stability
- Collaborator (CMO or People Leader) – Relationship-driven leaders who thrive on teamwork and alignment.
- Needs: Connection, Harmony, Recognition
- Craftsman (Head of Product or Engineering) – Deep thinkers who value mastery and solving complex problems.
- Needs: Competence, Understanding, Excellence
Listening First: Depositing in the Trust Account Before Debating Strategies
One of the biggest mistakes leadership teams make is diving into strategy debates before making sure everyone feels heard.
As outlined in The Speed of Trust, when leaders listen first—not just waiting for their turn to speak but truly seeking to understand what is driving the other person’s position—they build trust instead of depleting it.
By actively listening to each other’s needs before debating strategies, leadership teams can:
- Put deposits in the trust account (ensuring team health stays intact).
- Avoid defensive debates (since people don’t feel dismissed).
- Increase buy-in, even if their strategy isn’t chosen (because they were heard and respected).
From Conflicting Needs to Smart Strategies
Transforming Conflicting Needs into Strategic Solutions
Recognizing Trade-Offs and Designing Smart Strategies
- Not all needs can be met equally at the same time, and some will require trade-offs.
- The goal is to design strategies that meet the most important needs while minimizing friction.
- Example:
- A Visionary (CEO) pushes for fast progress, advocating for an aggressive Company Rock deadline.
- The Integrator (COO) prioritizes stability, needing time to ensure the team is set up for success.
- Instead of a deadlock, the team compromises by setting a firm due date with milestone check-ins—balancing urgency and execution quality.
Final Step: Committing to a Strategy
- Once a strategy is chosen, every leader must be fully aligned and committed to its execution.
- EOS tools like SMART Company Rocks with Weekly Milestones and Level 10 Meetings ensure clear expectations, accountability, and follow-through.
By listening first, clarifying needs, and designing thoughtful strategies, leadership teams move from frustration to focused execution.
