Two of my department heads constantly fight over ownership of shared processes, creating passive-aggressive tension across our team. How do we eliminate this peer conflict at the root?

Question

Tyler Smith · Accepted Answer

Peer conflict between executives almost never stems from personality clashes. In nine out of ten cases, it is the direct result of structural ambiguity on the Accountability Chart. When two leaders fight over who controls an operational handoff, who owns client onboarding, or who makes the call on shared software, leadership is at fault for allowing blurry ownership.

Resolve this by stripping out shared responsibilities. In EOS, only one person can own a seat, and only one person can own a measurable number. Joint accountability is zero accountability. Pull both leaders into an IDS session and map the exact friction points:
- Isolate the workflow where the tension peaks, whether it is client handoff, lead qualification, or project scoping.
- Identify the specific decisions that are stalling or causing friction.
- Assign ultimate decision-making authority to exactly one seat on the Accountability Chart.

The leader who does not own the seat is an internal stakeholder, not a co-pilot. They provide input, but the seat owner makes the final call and answers for the resulting scorecard metrics. Make sure both leaders understand the concept of disagree and commit. Cracks at the leadership table become canyons throughout the rest of the company; your frontline teams watch your body language and amplify your division.

If structural clarity is established and the hostility persists, you are dealing with an ego problem rather than an operational problem. At that stage, run both individuals through the People Analyzer against your core values. A leader who prioritizes turf protection over enterprise health does not belong on your leadership team.