Mentoring senior peers
On this page 9 topics
Overview
Topics
- Design facilitation
- conflict resolution
- technical influence
Learn first
3 h of practice (estimate)
Learning outcomes
- Facilitate design discussions among senior engineers so the best idea wins, not the loudest.
- Resolve technical conflicts between peers with structured techniques.
- Influence decisions without authority by building shared understanding.
- Give feedback to peers that they act on.
Lessons
Lab and exercises
Lab
SRB-018-LAB1 · Deadlock
Outcomes: 1–4 · Time: ~3 h Two role-played senior engineers disagree on the stock-ledger design (for example a single ledger with strong consistency versus per-warehouse ledgers with reconciliation). Meet each, facilitate a joint session with agreed criteria, and bring them to a decision both commit to. Finish with brief feedback to one of them. Acceptance: scored by role-players and an observer.
Exercises (assessment: facilitation simulation)
| ID | Outcome | Task |
|---|---|---|
| SRB-018-EX01 | 1 | Case: a senior peer dominates every design discussion. Write your facilitation plan for the next one. |
| SRB-018-EX02 | 1 | Prepare a 20-minute facilitation outline for choosing between two stock-ledger designs. |
| SRB-018-EX03 | 2 | Complete a conflict worksheet for two peers disagreeing on synchronous versus asynchronous stock updates. |
| SRB-018-EX04 | 2 | Case: after a decision, one engineer keeps reopening it. Write what you say and what you record. |
| SRB-018-EX05 | 3 | Build an influence map for proposing a shared event-schema standard to three team leads with different concerns. |
| SRB-018-EX06 | 4 | Write feedback for a senior peer who merges changes without review, using the observation-effect-next-step form. |
| SRB-018-EX07 | 4 | Review a draft piece of feedback ("you are too negative in reviews") and rewrite it so it can be acted on. |
Show solutions
- EX01 Collect written positions first, use a speaking order, restate positions, ask quieter voices directly, decide by criteria; speak privately with the dominant peer afterwards.
- EX02 Frame, written positions, steelman, score on criteria, then decision or experiment, with a decider named.
- EX03 Claims, underlying concerns (latency, consistency risk), evidence to gather (load test, failure drill), decider, review date.
- EX04 Restate the decision and the recorded dissent; ask what new evidence exists; if none, ask for commitment, if some, agree a review trigger.
- EX05 Rows per lead: what they care about, concern, what would help, who they trust; plan early involvement and a small reversible pilot.
- EX06 "In the last two releases you merged without review; the effect was a defect found in production. What was the reason? What could we agree for urgent changes?"
- EX07 Replace the label with dated examples, effect on others, and a concrete request such as "start with the question before the objection".
- Outcome 3 is also covered by the lab observer scoring.
Workplace evidence: a disagreement between senior engineers you helped resolve.
Quiz
Outcomes: O1 facilitating design discussions · O2 resolving conflict · O3 influence without authority · O4 peer feedback.
A self-check for you: nothing is graded, saved or sent anywhere. Choose an answer, then check it. You can try again as often as you like.
Practical part
Complete the facilitation simulation (SRB-018-LAB1, SRB-018 assessment) scored by role-players and an observer. Pass: at least 8/10 on the quiz and a facilitation score at or above the pass mark, ending in a decision both role-played engineers commit to.
Common mistakes
Deciding for others; avoiding the conflict.
Assessment
Facilitation simulation.
Workplace evidence
A disagreement between senior engineers you helped resolve.
Career relevance
Influence without authority (STF-011) and decision facilitation (STF-016).