•客观对待问题。禁止人身攻击，这是唯一的基本原则。除此之外，诚实决定一切。“这是一个商业问题。我们如何使项目更好地开展？阻碍项目进展的具体问题是什么？”莫里厄指出，“要求每个人都实事求是。每个问题理想的最后期限是什么时候？另外，切实可行的最后期限是什么时候？” 

    •研究细节。“向各方询问某个关键点对他们来说为什么如此重要——例如，他们为什么要求对方满足特定的最后期限。”莫里厄表示。如果每个人认识到问题的重要性，通常能更快地解决不同意见，引发的怨恨也更少。

    以上三个步骤足以让所有人同心协力。“一旦把情况视为商业问题，而且人们清楚了解到真正的问题所在，他们通常会提出解决方案。”莫里厄表示。

    如果他们没有做到，该怎么办？除了常用的软硬兼施管理方法外，莫里厄提出一个新方法。“要有人承担没能解决问题的后果。”他表示，“作为经理，你的职责是确保让每个人事先知道，如果由于不合作造成解决方案搁浅，阻碍解决问题的那个人需要承担后果。”

    引用《六个简单法则》中的一个案例：某主要汽车制造商的汽车很难维修，例如因为线路设置问题，更换前大灯时需要拆下发动机。公司安排造成问题的工程师暂时到服务部门工作，亲身了解他们的设计决策给郁闷的技术人员和不满的客户造成的影响。

    莫里厄表示，“如果不能制定出最后期限，他们日后可能要当面向一群生气的同事做出解释。但如果事先知道这一点，他们就有动力达成解决方案。”我们不希望事情发展到那一步。

    反馈：当友好的氛围掩盖了重要的问题时，你所在的公司是鼓励“和睦相处”，还是鼓励适当的冲突呢？欢迎评论。（财富中文网）

    翻译：乔树静/汪皓

    •Objectify the issues.The only ground rule is a ban on personal attacks. Apart from that, honesty rules. “This is a business problem. How can we make this project work better? What are the specific problems that are standing in the way?” Morieux says. “Require that everyone stick with the facts. What is the ideal deadline for each of them? Then, what is actually achievable?”

    •Dive into the details.“Ask each side why a particular sticking point is important to them—for instance, why they need the other team to meet a given deadline,” says Morieux. A disagreement will usually be resolved much faster, and with less resentment, if everyone understands why it matters.

    These three steps could well be enough to get everyone pulling in the same direction. “Once the situation is presented as a business challenge, and people have a clear understanding of the real issues, they’ll usually come up with solutions,” Morieux notes.

    What if they don’t? Morieux proposes a novel approach, beyond the usual management carrots and sticks. “Someone always bears the cost of failing to solve a problem,” he says. “Your job as a manager may be to make sure everyone knows in advance that, if a solution isn’t found because people haven’t been able to cooperate, the employee who is standing in the way will have to accept the consequences.”

    An example, from Six Simple Rules: A major automaker’s cars were notoriously hard to repair since, for instance, the wiring was arranged so that replacing the headlights meant removing the engine. The company sent the engineers who had created the problem to work in the service department for a while and hear firsthand how their design decisions affected irate technicians and unhappy customers.

    Says Morieux,“If people know beforehand that—if they can’t work out the deadline problem—they may have to explain themselves face-to-face with angry people later on, they are motivated to reach a solution.” Let’s hope it doesn’t come to that.

    Talkback:Does your company encourage “getting along” even when being nice covers up important problems, or is conflict expected and encouraged? Leave a comment below.

    Have a career question for Anne Fisher? Email askannie@fortune.com.