Conflict Resolution and Personal Development Process
Owner Circle | |
|---|---|
Last review | 2026-09-08 with VPPL-90 |
We strongly believe that an organization is only as good as the people in it. Unresolved personal conflicts block progress and success, and demotivate people. If people don’t continuously develop and adapt, or can’t grow, we risk a standstill.
So VSHN wants clear and supported paths for proactive development, and for addressing personal conflict in teams, between VSHNeers, and toward the organization and its culture.
Considerations
No individual performance metrics: We believe in shared responsibility and contribution to common outcomes; still, everyone needs to do their part: meet role expectations.
Value fit beats skills: Personality, character, and behavior are more important than already having the needed skills. Skills can be learned quickly with the right mindset, while changing character is a personal journey that takes years; we challenge and support people on it.
Separate the dimensions: Conduct (following policies), behavior (living our values), and skills/delivery (doing the job) are kept apart, so cases stay clear and the process feels fair to everyone.
Enforcement protects everyone: Not tolerating bad behavior, not delivering or rule breaking is not directed against one person; it protects everyone else and the organization. Structures and policies are worthless if nobody enforces them.
Self-organization needs clear structures: Self-organization based on self-responsibility doesn’t mean less structure, nor doing whatever we feel is right. It means we keep structures clear: clarify needs, agree on how we work, do our best to follow through, and bring up improvements when we see issues.
The defined process here is transparent, individual cases are HR confidential, and information is only given on a need-to-know basis.
Triggers
What starts an official process, versus what simply has to happen anyway, as part of our work culture?
- Reactive
We expect that VSHNeers give and accept feedback on their delivery, skills, mindset, and behavior, directly and in a constructive way. This is not a process; it is living our values.
We acknowledge that this is often not easy at all. Still, if someone has personal tensions towards another VSHNeer, we expect them to try and to get support for doing so as needed.
If that fails, meaning it doesn’t bring the needed improvement in reasonable time or the person can’t do it (lack of skills or energy, fears), we need clear paths to support and address such situations with the affected VSHNeers.
- Proactive
We expect curiosity: not accepting a bad status quo and being open to learning new things from everyone. This means organizing your own learning, using education budgets, learning on the job, and similar.
We also acknowledge that this is often hard, especially when the road ahead is long, resources are tight, workloads are high, or the goal isn’t clear. For that reason, VSHN supports VSHNeers with a facilitated path to personal development and growth.
The Observer Prelude & Circle Autonomy
Before anything is reported as a case, the observer or affected person talks to the person directly, listens to their perspective and gives constructive feedback, and raises the topic in circle-internal improvement formats. They can and often should get support from a Team Facilitator, People Operations Role or the People Role.
As long as an issue is handled directly between VSHNeers or in a circle, it is not a tracked case with People Operations.
If the person or circle can’t drive the needed improvement, and it seems to be an issue with an individual VSHNeer, the observer or a representative of the circle reports to People Operations and one of the four tracks below is opened.
Still, People Operations does not intervene in circle-internal organizational or operational issues, but focuses on the individual VSHNeer’s case.
Once the case is officially with the People Role, that role follows the process: it gathers feedback, talks with the VSHNeers involved, and takes measures accordingly. If there are examples of bad behavior or conduct, measures have to be taken; it is no longer optional, and the reporter cannot pull the case back.
The Four Tracks
VSHN distinguishes four tracks.
Tracks 1 to 3 are the personal development tracks and are described in detail below. Track 4 (policy violation) is handled through potential disciplinary measures and is described in full on its own page.
- Track 1 - Proactive Development
The person wants to learn something new, grow into a new role or seniority, or close a self-identified gap.
- Track 2 - Role-Fit / Delivery Concern (Competence)
About competencies and meeting role expectations, whether the person can do the job or build the skills.
- Track 3 - Value-Fit Concern (Personality)
About personality and mindset, whether the person genuinely shares our values.
- Track 4 (Policy Violation)
Discipline for clear-cut policy violations. See Disciplinary Process.
The Tool: Personal Improvement Plan
A Personal Improvement Plan (PIP) is a structured and individualized strategy designed to help a VSHNeer work towards their personal goals, close gaps in fulfilling their role, enhance skills, and develop in areas they want to improve in order to grow and reach their full potential.
A PIP is a development tool, not a disciplinary measure. While it can lead to termination, its purpose is never to argue for one, and it is not suited to handle policy violations.
VSHN PIPs are not performance improvement plans; see Considerations.
The VSHN PIP framework is valid within defined parameters: a delivery/competency-focused PIP (Track 2) runs at most 90 days, and a value-aligned behavior-focused PIP (Track 3) runs for 1 to 3 months. A development-focused PIP (Track 1) is not time-boxed as a disciplinary instrument and has no termination path.
The Need for Evidence
VSHN is not a place where a single person can start a case and then the affected person has to justify why it is not true. People Operations needs to understand different perspectives, needs concrete, real examples, and needs to talk to people for that. This will be uncomfortable sometimes. If people are not honest and do not provide enough evidence, the reporter, independent of their role or circle, must accept that a further step cannot be taken.
Track 1 - Proactive Development
No issue is observed. A VSHNeer wants to grow into a new role or close a self-identified skill or personality gap. In future, this can also be the track to grow into higher seniority or responsibility levels, or into ranges of the salary system.
- Process
The VSHNeer self-reports to People Operations.
Together (including the Delegator or role) they assess the goal: is it about development in the current role, about a higher range or level in the salary system, or about changing into another role, and is such a role available and when.
If it’s a fit, the person gets a development-focused PIP (skills, competencies, behavioral goals).
Regular peer feedback and check-ins happen, facilitated by People Operations.
This track uses the same PIP framework as Track 2, but with a positive trigger. Track 1 has no termination path. There are no consequences if the objectives of a Track 1 PIP are not met; the PIP is purely a development instrument.
Track 2 - Role-Fit / Delivery Concern (Competence)
About competencies and meeting role expectations, whether the person can do the job or build the missing skills.
- Process
The observer talks to the person directly. They can and often should get support from a Team Facilitator, People Operations or the People role, but it’s not yet tracked or taken over by People Operations.
If there’s no improvement in a reasonable timeframe, the observer checks options with the delegator circle of the affected person’s role.
If that doesn’t lead to a solution, the delegator representative brings the case to People Operations.
People Operations checks again with the Delegator of the person’s role whether the role expectations are up-to-date and how feedback should be gathered.
People Operations assesses or supports assessing whether it’s a competencies gap (trainable) or a fundamental mismatch (wrong role).
If it’s a competencies gap, the person must get a delivery and competency-focused Personal Improvement Plan with SMART goals, at most 90 days, and peer check-ins.
If it’s a mismatch, a role transition is explored: alternatives within VSHN are considered collaboratively (another role, dropping the role and decreasing workload, or a higher workload in another role). There needs to be an understood need and budget by the Delegator of such an alternative role. This follows the same mechanics as Changing Needs; see that section.
If a Personal Improvement Plan fails and there is no viable alternative, this leads to termination.
Before any termination decision in this track, People Operations must check with the team and others holding the same role (who would be affected) whether there are any objections. Objections only qualify if they show a credible alternative path that stakeholders and peers trust would fix the situation. If there are no qualifying objections, People Operations carries out the termination; see Employment Terminations.
Track 3 - Value-Fit Concern (Personality)
About personality and mindset, and how much the observed behavior stemming from that aligns with VSHN values. Personality or character is who you are, and you can change over time, but it cannot simply change within weeks or months. Being a value fit does not mean that someone has to strictly live by VSHN values, but it means they do not act against them repeatedly.
- Process
The observer talks to the person directly and gives it a few weeks. It might be a temporary mental or motivational issue. They can and often should get support from a Team Facilitator, People Operations or the People role, but it’s not yet tracked or taken over by People Operations.
If there’s no improvement, the observer reports to People Operations.
People Operations talks to the person and explores whether the person understands the values as we do and genuinely sees themself in them. If the behavior doesn’t match but the person is genuinely willing to develop, check if it’s okay to gather peer feedback.
If the feedback shows a clear picture, People Operations talks again, with concrete examples of expectations vs. observed behavior, and explores whether the person agrees, genuinely values these principles, and wants to work on this.
Based on that exploration, the decision logic is:
If the person is genuinely willing, they must get coaching plus a value-aligned-behavior-focused PIP (1 to 3 months, peer feedback, People Operations facilitates).
If the person is not willing, they are asked why they are here if they don’t share these beliefs, a break is taken, and the case is discussed in People Role. This usually leads to contract termination from either side.
Before any termination decision in this track, People Operations must check with the team and others holding the same role (who would be affected) whether there are any objections. Objections only qualify if they show a credible alternative path that stakeholders and peers trust would fix the situation. If there are no objections, People Operations must carry out the termination; see Employment Terminations.