Host Dr. Lee Sharma uses one apple to unpack interest, identity, and worldview conflicts. In this solo episode, learn to spot cues, stay on-topic, and resolve disputes—whether it’s call schedules, patient refusals, or partnership equity—before relationships crack.
This episode is sponsored by Lightstone DIRECT. Lightstone DIRECT invites you to partner with a $12B AUM real estate institution as you grow your portfolio. Access the same single-asset multifamily and industrial deals Lightstone pursues with its own capital – Lightstone co-invests a minimum of 20% in each deal alongside individual investors like you. You’re an institution. Time to invest like one.
_____________________________________
One apple, three conflicts.
In this solo episode of The Scalpel and Sword Podcast, Dr. Lee Sharma breaks down the hidden languages of conflict using a single prop: an apple.
Interest-Based Conflict (The Apple Itself): Tangible, quantifiable resources—money, time, call shifts. Logical fix? Split it. But when “half” isn’t enough (e.g., a part-time doc’s reimbursement drop), the fight escalates.
Identity-Based Conflict (Apple + Mirror): Self-image enters the chat. “I worked harder,” “I have seniority,” “I gave up partnership for family.” Cue: titles, effort, or sacrifice thrown like grenades. Dr. Sharma recounts her 90s practice battle—offering to cover walk-in OB for fair pay—met with “heck no.” Not about money. About who she was (part-time = less committed). Fix: Acknowledge identity (“I hear you worked hard”), then reframe to the apple.
Worldview-Based Conflict (Apple + Lens): Same object, different meaning. Intern-year story: pregnant teen refuses IV antibiotics. To Dr. Sharma? Lifesaving. To patient? Sister-killing poison (from prior sepsis death). Without worldview alignment, coercion fails. With it? Patient feels seen, buys in.
Physicians excel at rapid history-taking—use it for worldview analysis on the fly. When patients say “I felt heard,” you’ve nailed their lens. Master these three languages to keep conflicts from fracturing teams, partnerships, or patient trust.
Three Actionable Takeaways:
About the Show:
Behind every procedure, every patient encounter, lies an untold story of conflict and negotiation. Scalpel and Sword, hosted by Dr. Lee Sharma—physician, mediator, and guide—invites listeners into the unseen battles and breakthroughs of modern medicine. With real conversations, human stories, and practical tools, this podcast empowers physicians to reclaim their voices, sharpen their skills, and wield their healing power with both precision and purpose.
About the Host:
Dr. Lee Sharma is a gynecologist based in Auburn, AL, with over 30 years of clinical experience. She holds a Master’s in Conflict Resolution and is passionate about helping colleagues navigate workplace challenges and thrive through open conversations and practical tools.
[00:00:00] Hello, my peaceful warriors. Welcome to the Scalpel and Sword Podcast. I'm your host, Dr. Lee Sharma, physician and conflict analyst. I'm so happy to be with you today. This is kind of a new one for me. I'm going to talk with you today about speaking the language of conflict. And this is a really interesting topic to me because I feel like when people understand.
What's being spoken and what the conflict is about, we're much more likely to understand it, approach it, be able to work through it, and also on the other side of it, get a better understanding of ourselves, the other people involved, and more likely to get a resolution, which is beneficial for everybody, and especially in medicine, that somebody's always gonna be the patient.
It's really important to me when we're getting into conflict to be very clear about what that conflict is about. So what we're gonna do today is we're going to talk about three [00:01:00] general different types of conflict in terms of the things that are at issue. And we're gonna sort of learn how to listen for cues that let us know what kind of conflict we're in.
You can't really see it, but I have an apple and we're gonna use this apple today to talk about these three different types of conflict. First and foremost, we're gonna talk about interest based conflict. Interest based conflict is when we are talking about things that we can quantify. So we are in conflict about a specific resource or a specific item that we can actually define.
So this may be money. This could be time, this could be call schedules, this could be or start times. There are so many quantifiable things that can be at conflict, but right now we're gonna talk about my little apple right here. So let's say I have another person in the room and that person's hungry and I am hungry, and [00:02:00] we only have one apple.
If we are dealing with a strictly interest based conflict, the only thing at question is who gets the apple. If this is purely interest based, the most logical solution would be to split the apple in half, and if we're splitting the apple in half, then conflict resolved, right? Because that person gets half, I get half.
We're all happy, but let's just say. Maybe I haven't eaten today. I've had a long day in clinic and I really want this whole apple. And let's say the other person who's in the room also had a very busy day. They were doing a lot of work. maybe they were in surgery all day, but they're really hungry too, and half an apple isn't going to work.
When you get to the point that the resources are limited. Or let's say getting half or having an equitable solution isn't gonna work. That conflict escalates. If [00:03:00] you are in an interest based conflict process, let's say you kind of look at this conflict and this is about bonuses, and you come up with a really fair solution for everybody involved and for some reason one or multiple parties involved, say.
That's not gonna work for me. You're probably not dealing with a purely interest-based conflict. So I'm gonna give you an example for my own life. When I was working with my previous practice and this was back in the late 1990s, early two thousands I had gone part-time. I had two very small children.
My husband was a physician. We were basically just on roller skates all the time. And to really feel like I was raising our children, I cut my schedule back. And to do that, I gave up my partnership, which ladies, if you're listening to this podcast, women physicians don't do that. Please don't ever do that.
But I did. That was the advice that I got, and I followed it. And when I gave up my partnership. That also, of course, gave up a [00:04:00] lot of financial stake in the practice, and as a result, I found that my reimbursement really dropped, I mean, dropped more than it probably should have for the hours I was working.
So I wanted to be fair to my partners, but I also wanted to make sure that I was getting reimbursed equitably. So what I did is I started looking for pain points in the practice. So where are places in my work that I can add value? And hopefully if I'm adding value, then that's gonna help with reimbursement and that's going to allow me to get more fairly reimbursed.
And so the pain point in that particular practice was seeing work in obstetric patients walk in obs. So I went to my practice and I worked up a plan with schedule and reimbursement saying I will see the work in patients and when I see the work in patients, then I should get reimbursed this amount.
And I looked at everybody's schedules. I looked at the way the workflow was, I mean, it was I think a pretty thorough assessment. And so I sat down with the other doctors [00:05:00] in the practice and I said, this is what I propose. And I was really happy about the proposal and as an interest-based solution. To my conflict.
I felt like this was a good direction, and the answer I got when I presented this interest-based solution was, no, not only no, but heck no and never. Okay. And I was actually in my master's program at this point, so this was a really good place for me to be in terms of understanding what was happening.
And when I realized what was happening, I realized really quickly that I, like our two friends with the Apple were not in a strictly interest based problem. This had escalated, and when interest based solutions escalate or aren't really what's happening. Beneficially with a conflict, you're dealing with identity.
So now we're talking about the second type of conflict, which is an identity based conflict. [00:06:00] Identity based conflict is when we bring our self view or the view of the other party or parties into the conflict. Now, we may not be aware that we're doing it, but anytime you're in an interest based conflict.
Process and the interest based solutions don't work. You've probably got an identity based conflict on your hands. So what are some tip offs that you're dealing with an identity based conflict? Well, so let's go back to our Apple. I'm in the room with my other friend who also wants this Apple. We're both hungry.
We've both had a long day. Then one person says, you know what? I worked a lot harder than you today. I saw more patients. I was up earlier than you, and because of that, I should have this apple. Anytime somebody starts bringing other topics in regarding themselves and who they are into the conflict, you're dealing with identity.
You have just changed the subject of that conflict. So if you're in this situation and [00:07:00] somebody says, I did this, or I am this, therefore this is how the conflict should resolve, you know, you're dealing with identity. If anybody's a fan of the Mission Impossible Movies, which I am a big fan, I love that whole franchise.
In the third Mission Impossible movie where Ethan Hunt is at the CIA and he's in a meeting with, his superior who's played by Billy Crudup and then their Superior, who's played by Lawrence Fishburne. we'll link that scene in the show notes because it is one of the best examples of how identity plays into conflict I have ever seen in a movie.
So basically. Billy crude UPS character and Tom Cruise's character are getting yelled at by Lawrence Fishburne for a mission where an operative died. Who was Kerry Russell and how much do we love Kerry Russell? So Lawrence Fishburn iss yelling at them, and Billy crude UPS character says, as the director of the department, and Lawrence Fishburne immediately [00:08:00] says, did you throw a title at me?
It's perfect because Billy crude UPS character is using his identity as a way to resolve the conflict. He throws it out there and without missing a beat, Lawrence Fish Burns character, calls him out on it. And anytime we're in that situation and we start to see this conflict go into an identity realm, we see people bringing in parts of themselves.
We should be able to recognize that and if we recognize it, it should change how we approach the conflict. Because if you're approaching that conflict and you start to bring in elements of identity, then if you know that that's what's being talked about, you can actually make sure the conflict stays on track and you can address that identity issue.
Now, of course, it's not always gonna be with our boss and Lawrence Fishburne character being Lawrence Fishburne character, and he's awesome. Absolutely was able to call him out. We're not always gonna be in that [00:09:00] kind of power dynamic. So because of that, if somebody says, I worked harder than you, I have a bigger title than you, I have more importance than you.
And therefore I should have the resource being able to say to that person, respectfully, I totally hear you and I totally support you, but. Issue is the apple. And so while I respect your title, and I know you had a hard day, maybe splitting the apple in half isn't the best solution. And if we're able to do that in that conflict situation, if we're able to actually recognize that identity has entered the chat, but.
At the same time, stay on mission with the actual subject of the conflict, whatever that happens to be, if that happens to be a call schedule. I know that you're working really hard, and I know that you're really busy, and I know that you've worked here longer than I have, but we also both deserve a quality of life.
Is there a way we can approach this finite topic of call, where we actually both [00:10:00] respect each other's positions and each other's effort? Who we are and still find an equitable solution. And it may be harder to do if you have limited resources. I mean, heaven knows in medicine right now, we all have limited resources.
But if you're able to approach it in such a way that you acknowledge the identity and you're still keeping your eye on the apple. You're more likely to have people buy into the process, and if they're buying into the process, you're more likely to get a resolution and a resolution that keeps relationships intact.
Because when people start talking about identity, I mean, that's very personal. And so if we ignore the topic of the identity, if we happen to, or heaven forbid, actually attack the person's identity, which. No, we don't wanna do that. Then we are at risk of not only not getting an equitable good conflict resolution, we're at risk of danger, the relationship.
So one interest, the Apple, [00:11:00] two, looking at the apple with a mirror in front of us, and that mirror is identity based conflict. We now know two types. We talk about interest based and we talk about identity based. So I said there was a third one, right? So the third one involves the way that we look at the apple.
What does the apple symbolize to you and what does it symbolize to me? So let's say we've got the same two people. They're in a room, we're discussing the apple. I'm in here with my friend. We both really want this whole apple. It's been a day. If the apple to me represents nourishment, this is what this apple is.
It's a big old piece of lunch right here, but to the person in front of me, it is respect. It is a symbol of spirituality. It is a symbol of. Respect of their needs, and I don't see that, then my discussion with them is going to be really [00:12:00] difficult, and the conflict again, is gonna escalate. So there's a name for this third one, which is called worldview.
When we look at things differently in conflict, our worldviews are different from the person that's across from us. So think of looking at this apple with a lens. So the way I look at it through my lens is different than the way that somebody else looks at it through their lens. So what's an example of a worldview conflict?
When I was an intern, many, many, many moons ago I was called to the floor to see a patient who was in her late teens, who was 20 weeks pregnant, who got admitted with pyelonephritis, with kidney infection, and in pregnancy, we admit those patients because they can become septic and very sick. So we always admit them for IV antibiotics.
So this particular patient was refusing her IV antibiotics. And so the nurse has called me because she was refusing the meds and they didn't know what to do. So I go up there to see the patient, and I, [00:13:00] like most interns, I think was stupid and only thing I could think of at that point was how to cover my butt.
I was worried about getting yelled at by my superiors for letting this patient. Go off antibiotics. So I went in there with a couple of nurses and it's like, look, if you don't wanna take 'em, I don't know what else I can do for you. Do I need to have you sign a MA papers? Like I said, I was stupid and she stood up and she got really angry with me and started yelling, and I didn't know what to do and I had to walk outta the room.
Later on, I found out from one of my upper level residents. That she had had an older sister who also had pyelonephritis during a pregnancy who unfortunately did die of sepsis. And in this patient's mind, the reason why her sister died was because she was given IV antibiotics. Now, if I had taken the time to understand her worldview about what those antibiotics meant to her, to me.
As the person [00:14:00] providing the antibiotics, what it meant to me was I was going to keep her from getting septic, get her, well be able to get her go home so she could have a good, healthy pregnancy, but because of her sister and because of that experience, her worldview of the antibiotics was completely different.
And if I had taken the time to actually understand what her worldview was. Then I would've been able to walk in there and say, look, I get it. I understand what happened to your sister. I know it's terrifying, but let's talk about sepsis and let's talk about what may have happened to her and why I'm so worried if we don't give you these antibiotics, the same thing might happen to you.
And if I'd walked in there actually trying to understand the lens with which she viewed the antibiotics, at that point you start working towards a resolution. Now, I still may not have been the person who would've gotten that resolution. Right. I still may have been a part of the story. It may have taken the second or third or fourth person or someone much, much more groany [00:15:00] than I was at that point to come in and talk with her, for her to hopefully see that this was gonna be the right course of action.
But at that point in time. I didn't know. I didn't understand how to talk to people and I certainly didn't understand how to approach a worldview, and it's really interesting when you look at really good clinicians, like people who do this all the time, they're kind of doing worldview analysis on the fly, like every time they walk in to see a patient.
As they're taking that history and talking to the patient, they're already sort of getting a feel for. Where this patient's coming from, what their medical history's been like, what their experiences are with other healthcare providers, and how that's colored their worldview of what you're talking about and.
When doctors, nurses, nurse practitioners, advanced care people do this, it is so cool because what you get out of that interaction, what the patient experiences is that they feel heard. And if you start hearing patients [00:16:00] say, or people that you're in conflict with saying, I really feel like I was heard.
Or I feel like I was seen when people start using those words, whatever situation it was, and it may not have even been a conflict, but it may have been a conversation where you were interacting about a topic. If somebody walks away from that saying, I felt heard, or I felt seen, you were actually on that patient's worldview.
They felt like you understood where they were coming from and their perspective. And anytime you get that feedback, number one, pat yourself on the back because that's really cool that you're able to do it. Number two, especially if you were doing this in a situation that was either a conflict or a potential for a conflict, you've helped that person buy in.
That much more to their relationship with you and their relationship with the healthcare system or how they process that conflict. So just to look at it again, number one, interest-based conflict, which is just [00:17:00] the apple dealing strictly with resources, finite, definable things. Number two, identity conflict, where we're talking about the way we see ourselves and how that enters into that conflict situation.
So think about a mirror that you're holding up to yourself and actually using that self-image in the conflict situation, being able to recognize that you've brought it in or somebody else has brought that in. And if you're able to recognize that, to acknowledge it, and then reframe the conflict back. To the interest in question.
And the third one is worldview. So we're now looking at the apple with a lens. It's how we look at our situation. It's how we look at this topic and understanding that worldview is going to be shaped by so many different things. Our life experiences, our educational experiences, our family experiences.
All of those things go into our worldview and understanding that each of us is walking around. With this [00:18:00] lens, it is how we see the world, and if you can understand somebody else's worldview, take the time to really sit and listen and get a handle on that. If you are ever in a conflict situation, you are much more likely to have the other person in front of you understand where you're coming from and the person in front of you to feel seen and heard.
So this is a new episode type for me. I hope that you got something out of it, and I hope in context with the other episodes on Scalpel and Sword, it starts to increase your conflict resolution vocabulary and as we all learn to speak conflict well because it is inevitable. The better we are at speaking the language, the more likely we are to have the resolution.
I hope this episode helps. I hope you enjoy it, and until next time, my peaceful warriors be at peace.