# Team Of Rivals Assembly > Build high-performing teams from former competitors, critics, or conflicting personalities by transforming rivalry into collaboration. Based on Abraham Lincoln's approach of surrounding himself wit... - Skill: `sethmblack/team-of-rivals-assembly` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds add sethmblack/team-of-rivals-assembly` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/sethmblack/team-of-rivals-assembly/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: Coding & Dev Tools - License: MIT - Author: sethmblack (https://skillmd.com/u/sethmblack) - Updated: 2026-09-08 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/sethmblack/team-of-rivals-assembly --- # Team of Rivals Assembly Build high-performing teams from former competitors, critics, or conflicting personalities by transforming rivalry into collaboration. Based on Abraham Lincoln's approach of surrounding himself with the strongest people—even those who opposed him. --- ## When to Use - Hiring or assembling a new leadership team - Inheriting a team with internal conflicts or factions - Post-merger or acquisition team integration - Building coalitions from competing stakeholders - User asks "How do I work with my critics?" - Need to transform competitors into collaborators --- ## Inputs | Input | Required | Description | |-------|----------|-------------| | situation | Yes | The team context (new hire, existing conflict, merger, etc.) | | rivals | Yes | The people or groups in competition/conflict | | mission | Yes | The shared purpose that should unite them | | constraints | No | Political realities, non-negotiables, reporting structures | --- ## Lincoln's Team of Rivals Principles ### Principle 1: Seek Strength, Not Comfort Lincoln chose rivals not despite their strength but because of it. He wanted the best minds, even if they were difficult. **Key Question:** "Who is the strongest candidate for this role—regardless of whether they like me or agree with me?" **Warning Signs of Comfort-Seeking:** - Hiring people who won't challenge you - Avoiding candidates who seem "difficult" - Prioritizing cultural fit over capability ### Principle 2: Give Rivals Real Responsibility Lincoln did not sidelight his rivals with token roles. Seward became Secretary of State; Chase, Secretary of Treasury. They had genuine authority. **Pattern:** - Assign rivals to roles that use their strengths - Give them ownership over outcomes - Make their success tied to the team's success **Key Insight:** People who feel underutilized or tokenized will undermine from within. People who feel trusted with real work become invested in success. ### Principle 3: Create Safe Space for Disagreement Lincoln's cabinet meetings were famously contentious. Members called each other "liar, traitor, thief" in meetings. But Lincoln remained at the center, absorbing conflict without retaliation. **Pattern:** - Establish that disagreement is expected and valued - Model calm response to criticism - Never punish people for honest dissent - Channel disagreement toward decision quality, not personal attack ### Principle 4: Maintain Mission Focus Personal rivalries dissolved in Lincoln's cabinet when focused on the overwhelming shared purpose: preserving the Union. **Pattern:** - Articulate the mission clearly and repeatedly - Frame individual roles in terms of mission contribution - When conflict arises, redirect to "What does the mission require?" ### Principle 5: Write the Conciliatory Note When cabinet members felt slighted, Lincoln would write notes saying "If I hurt you in any way I did not mean to do so. Forgive me." **Pattern:** - When relationships strain, reach out personally - Acknowledge your possible contribution to friction - Prioritize the relationship over being right --- ## Decision Framework: Should This Person Be on the Team? ``` Is this person strong and capable? ├── No → Don't hire for strength you don't need └── Yes → Continue Do they oppose you or your approach? ├── No → Standard hiring consideration └── Yes → Continue Is their opposition principled or personal? ├── Personal/petty → Proceed with caution; may not be convertible └── Principled → Strong candidate for Team of Rivals approach Can their strength be channeled toward the mission? ├── No → Their strength will work against you └── Yes → Consider seriously; may become your strongest ally ``` --- ## Workflow ### Step 1: Gather and Review Inputs Collect all relevant information: - Review the provided data and context - Identify key parameters and constraints - Clarify any ambiguities or missing information - Establish success criteria ### Step 2: Analyze the Situation Perform systematic analysis: - Identify patterns and relationships - Evaluate against established frameworks - Consider multiple perspectives - Document key findings ### Step 3: Generate Recommendations Create actionable outputs: - Synthesize insights from analysis - Prioritize recommendations by impact - Ensure recommendations are specific and measurable - Consider implementation feasibility ## Output Format ```markdown ## Team of Rivals Assessment ### The Mission [What unifying purpose should this team serve?] ### Current Landscape [Who are the rivals/factions? What drives their opposition?] ### Strength Inventory | Person/Group | Key Strength | Current Opposition | Convertibility | |--------------|--------------|-------------------|----------------| | [name] | [strength] | [why they oppose] | High/Medium/Low | ### Role Assignments [How should rivals be positioned to use their strengths while advancing the mission?] ### Integration Strategy 1. [Immediate step to signal trust] 2. [Structure for productive disagreement] 3. [Mission-focus mechanism] 4. [Relationship maintenance approach] ### Risk Mitigation [What could go wrong and how will you address it?] ### Success Indicators [How will you know the team is functioning as a team of rivals rather than a team in conflict?] ``` --- ## Constraints - This approach requires genuine respect for rivals' capabilities—it cannot be faked - Works best when the mission is clear and compelling; weak mission = persistent conflict - Requires leader who can absorb conflict without retaliating - Not appropriate when opposition is genuinely malicious rather than principled - Takes time—transformation from rival to ally is measured in months, not days --- ## Outputs **Primary Output:** A structured analysis document that identifies and articulates patterns, insights, and actionable recommendations based on the input data. **Format:** ```markdown ## Analysis: [Topic] ### Key Findings - [Finding 1] - [Finding 2] - [Finding 3] ### Recommendations 1. [Action 1] 2. [Action 2] 3. [Action 3] ``` **Example output:** See the Example section below for a complete demonstration. ## Example **Input:** "I'm taking over as VP of Engineering. Two directors who both wanted my job now report to me. One is openly hostile; the other is passive-aggressive. How do I make this work?" **Output:** ## Team of Rivals Assessment ### The Mission Build and ship product that delights customers and grows the business. Neither director wanted your job for its own sake—they wanted to build great things. That's your alignment point. ### Current Landscape | Person/Group | Key Strength | Current Opposition | Convertibility | |--------------|--------------|-------------------|----------------| | Director A (openly hostile) | Technical depth, direct communication, team loyalty | Feels passed over, believes you lack technical credibility | High—hostility suggests they care; indifference would be worse | | Director B (passive-aggressive) | Political awareness, stakeholder management, consensus building | Resents having to defer; may believe they were better suited | Medium—passive style makes true feelings harder to read | ### Role Assignments **Director A:** Assign ownership of the most technically challenging initiative. Frame it as: "I need someone with your technical depth to own this. You're the only one who can." Give them authority and visibility. **Director B:** Assign cross-functional coordination where their political skills shine. Frame it as: "This requires navigating stakeholders that only you understand." Their influence needs become an asset. ### Integration Strategy 1. **Immediate (Week 1):** Meet individually with each. Say: "You wanted this role. I respect that—it shows ambition. I need your strength to succeed. Tell me what you need from me to do your best work." Listen more than you talk. 2. **Structure for disagreement (Week 2):** Establish regular 1:1s and make clear: "I expect you to tell me when you think I'm wrong. I'd rather hear it from you privately than discover it in outcomes." 3. **Mission-focus (Ongoing):** In every team meeting, start with customer/business outcomes. Frame conflicts as "What does the customer need?" not "Who is right?" 4. **Relationship maintenance:** When things go well for their teams, credit them publicly. When friction arises, address it privately and with curiosity, not accusation. ### Risk Mitigation - If Director A remains hostile after 90 days of genuine engagement, consider whether the role is right for them - Watch for Director B undermining through omission or selective information sharing - Document your efforts to engage—if someone must eventually leave, you need a clear record that you tried ### Success Indicators - Directors start bringing problems directly to you rather than escalating around you - They defend your decisions when you're not in the room - Cross-team collaboration improves - You genuinely learn from their perspectives and change your mind sometimes --- ## Integration This skill is part of the **Abraham Lincoln** expert persona. Use it when building teams that require harnessing strong, potentially conflicting personalities toward a shared mission. Lincoln's insight was that strength—even oppositional strength—is an asset if properly channeled.