Guide · When it grinds
Updated: 24 July 2026
You argue and can’t move forward? Most conflicts in a leadership or founder duo are experienced as an interpersonal problem – but they’re a structural problem. The five typical patterns, a self-assessment and first steps.
Contents
If you’re in the middle of it right now: this can be sorted. The most important sentence first – most duo conflicts aren’t a relationship problem but a structural one. Unclear roles, missing decision rules, unspoken expectations. That’s a relieving message, because structure can be repaired.
Why duo conflicts differ
Unlike a team conflict, a conflict in a leadership duo affects the top – and the top is visible. The team senses it immediately, decisions stall, and because both carry responsibility, neither can simply overrule the other. That’s exactly why it helps to move the conflict from the personal to the structural level.
The five typical patterns
The unclear final decision
How it feels: It feels like stubbornness: each insists on their view, nothing moves.
What’s structurally behind it: Behind it isn’t stubbornness but a missing rule: no one ever set who decides in doubt.
First step: First step: play through a single fundamental decision and set who makes it in the end.
The uneven load
How it feels: One pulls more but doesn’t say so – until frustration builds.
What’s structurally behind it: The load split was never made explicit, so it grows crooked.
First step: First step: honestly write down the actual split, not the felt one.
The team plays you off
How it feels: You get contradictory information and puzzle over decisions you never made that way.
What’s structurally behind it: Without a unified line, others use the gap – usually not maliciously, but because they can.
First step: First step: agree that important answers are given in coordination.
Grown together without roles
How it feels: It ran well for a long time, now everything suddenly grinds.
What’s structurally behind it: You never defined roles because it worked without – until it didn’t.
First step: First step: retroactively define who’s responsible for what.
Different goal images
How it feels: You argue over individual decisions that are actually symptoms.
What’s structurally behind it: Your goal images were never aligned – you’re steering for different harbours.
First step: First step: separately write down where you want to be in two years, and compare.
Which pattern is yours?
Five questions for self-assessment – answer them honestly, each on its own:
- Do fundamental decisions regularly stay open with you? → Pattern 1.
- Does one of you often think „I do more“ but not say it? → Pattern 2.
- Do you often hear „but the other one said …“? → Pattern 3.
- Has it recently started grinding on things that used to run? → Pattern 4.
- Do you argue over details that never resolve? → Pattern 5.
First steps you can take alone
- Separate the issue from the structure. Write down the current argument and ask: which missing rule is behind it?
- Clarify a single decision rule. Start with the final decision – it solves the most.
- Make the load split explicit. Who does what, how much, visible to both.
- Agree on a unified external line. No more important answers on your own.
When it no longer works alone
- The conflict has slipped to the personal level – it’s no longer about the issue.
- The team visibly suffers from the situation.
- You only talk about factual matters, avoiding the fundamentals.
- A separation is on the table.
If you recognise yourselves here, a guided conversation makes sense. In tandem coaching we work exactly on these patterns – calmly, in order, on the structure.
Frequently asked questions
Is our conflict normal?
Yes. Almost every duo goes through such phases. What matters is whether you approach it as a structural question or a personal accusation.
Can we solve it without help?
Often yes – the first steps above are meant seriously. But if the conflict has become personal, an outside neutral view helps.
What if only one of us wants to talk?
Then that’s the first finding. Sometimes it’s enough for one person to take the first structural step and invite rather than demand.
How quickly does it get better?
Clarity on one decision rule often emerges in a single conversation. Rebuilding trust takes longer.
Want to get out of it together?
In tandem coaching we sort out what it’s really about – and build the rules that hold. Intro call free.
Amrit Rescheneder
Amrit Rescheneder helps organisations and leadership tandems build shared leadership that works. She led in a job-sharing model herself for years – after 15 years of leadership responsibility in banking. She knows shared leadership from practice, not from textbooks.