How do you resolve conflicting requirements?

Direct answer

What a strong answer covers

How it works

Requirements conflict when they serve different goals or when the same words mean different things to different people. The first step is tracing each one back to the goal, the stakeholder, the evidence, and the constraint behind it, which often dissolves the conflict by revealing that one side wants a report every hour because they cannot trust the monthly one. When the conflict is real, it is written down as options with their consequences in money, risk, time, and user impact, and taken to the person accountable for the outcome, who decides against principles the organisation has agreed in advance. The decision and its rationale are recorded.

Example

Security required that sessions expire after 15 minutes of inactivity; the warehouse team required that scanners stay logged in through an eight-hour shift because re-authentication with gloves cost minutes each time. Tracing the goals showed security cared about unattended access on shared devices, so the resolution was a device-bound session with a short unlock code instead of a full login, agreed by the CISO as the accountable owner.

Common mistakes

• Picking the requirement of the more senior stakeholder without examining the goals.
• Averaging the two positions into a solution that serves neither.
• Leaving the conflict unresolved so the team implements whichever ticket comes first.

A useful answer structure

Answer from your own work.

Do not memorise a script: use only examples you can explain honestly in follow-up questions.