[steve___]

There are many ways to skin a cat. Assuming the equity amongst the co-founders is equal, I think the methods used to resolve conflicts are mainly dependent on the co-founders dispositions.

For me personally, I believe there has to be a willingness from the founders to put the customers' needs first. If I truly believe I'm working with my equals, then their opposing views are just as important as my own.

Assuming there are four founders and there is a conflict then I'd suggest the founders get in the same room and talk about the problem first. Make sure everyone agrees on what the exact problem is. Assuming there is still a conflict then brainstorm on possible solutions. At this point if there is still a conflict and the vote is 2-2 then I'd suggest flipping a coin. Trying one of the solutions is more valuable than both ideas combined. The insights the founders will receive from attempting the solution should make it obvious which solution is best.

Lastly if conflicts are cropping up on a consistent basis, if the general mood of the group is negative, if people are going off on their own and/or if there is a strong belief in the group that not everyone has the customer needs as the primary focus, then quit. Use a shot-gun[1] clause to resolve the issue of how to buy out a partner and move on. It is easier said than done.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shotgun_clause