Two architects on the property-appraisal system disagree about what the vendor SLA actually requires for overnight batch windows. How should the Scrum Master / Team Coach treat the source?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
If the fight is "what does the contract say," that is a tape-measure problem, not a religion problem. Pull the SLA and the batch logs before anyone books a values retreat. Facts first; deeper values only if the document still leaves a real clash.
Full Explanation
When two architects on a property-appraisal system disagree about what the vendor SLA actually requires for overnight batch windows, the Scrum Master / Team Coach should treat the source as a facts conflict: check the SLA and operational data before treating it as a values fight. Many heated "principle" arguments dissolve once the contract language and batch logs are on the table. Jumping first to a values conflict about fairness that needs a long culture workshop delays the factual check. Treating it as an interpersonal grudge and sending both architects to HR before anyone opens the SLA pathologizes a documentation question. Declaring it an RTE contract problem the team must not inspect removes the people closest to the batch windows from evidence gathering. Exam caveat: SASM conflict-source analysis distinguishes facts conflicts from values and interpersonal sources; verify facts first when an SLA or data dispute is central. Operational check: open the SLA clause and recent batch-window metrics with both architects, agree what the evidence says, update the working assumption or story acceptance, and only then escalate remaining values or relationship issues if facts did not resolve the dispute. Keep the civic appraisal batch risk visible on the board until the window is stable.