Common Collision Patterns

Dimensional collisions are not infinite. There are six primary pairings — D-I, D-S, D-C, I-S, I-C, S-C — and each one produces a predictable friction pattern. Knowing the pattern means you can diagnose the conflict before the participants have finished describing it. I have seen every one of these patterns multiple times on this team alone. They are not theoretical. They are Tuesday.

1. D-S: The Pace Collision The most common. D pushes for speed. S pushes for stability. D sees S as slow. S sees D as reckless. Resolution structure: advance notice on changes, transition timelines, defined decision windows. CLOSER and CLAUSE. Every single deal. The 48-hour notice protocol is the structural fix.
2. D-C: The Depth Collision D wants to decide now. C wants more analysis. D sees C as overthinking. C sees D as under-thinking. Resolution structure: time-boxed analysis phases with mandatory decision points. The analysis informs the decision, but the decision has a deadline.
3. I-C: The Evidence Collision I sells the vision. C demands the proof. I sees C as a killjoy. C sees I as irresponsible. Resolution structure: separate the pitch from the validation. Let I inspire, then let C verify. Both phases are valuable. Both must happen. Sequencing eliminates the collision.
4. I-S: The Energy Collision I brings constant novelty and change. S wants predictability and routine. I sees S as resistant. S sees I as exhausting. Resolution structure: innovation windows — defined periods for new ideas — with stability periods in between. Change is contained, not constant.
5. D-I: The Direction Collision Both are assertive but in different ways. D asserts through authority. I asserts through influence. In low-stakes situations, they collaborate beautifully. In high-stakes situations, they compete for the room. Resolution structure: clear scope division — D owns the decision, I owns the buy-in.
6. S-C: The Comfort Collision Both are cautious but for different reasons. S values relationship harmony. C values analytical correctness. When they disagree, S wants to find common ground, C wants to find the right answer. Resolution structure: evidence-based discussion with explicit relationship preservation — "we are going to challenge this analysis, and the challenge is professional, not personal."