Your team is clashing over project priorities during a change effort. How do you resolve the disputes?
Navigating team clashes over project priorities is essential for maintaining momentum during change efforts. Here's how to address these disputes effectively:
How do you manage team disputes over project priorities? Share your strategies.
Your team is clashing over project priorities during a change effort. How do you resolve the disputes?
Navigating team clashes over project priorities is essential for maintaining momentum during change efforts. Here's how to address these disputes effectively:
How do you manage team disputes over project priorities? Share your strategies.
-
Lead toward a mutual understanding in cases where there is a team conflict on project priorities. Open up the line of sight into objectives and align to the greater vision to which each priority contributes. Let active listening, collaboration, and data or impact assessments drive decisions. Emphasizing what you are in common helps build mutual respect, and perceived conflicts can be an opportunity for alignment.
-
Ah, project priorities: the gladiator arena of the workplace. Your team is clashing, tension’s rising, and someone just threw a spreadsheet. Time to step in. First, play referee—get everyone to agree on the actual goals (yes, those things in the brief they didn’t read). Then, prioritise based on impact, not volume of shouting. Finally, remind them: you're a team, not contestants on a reality show. Align, compromise, and if all else fails—bribe them with biscuits.
-
Team disputes can derail progress, but the right approach turns conflict into alignment. Here’s how I handle it: ↳ Focus on Shared Goals: Shift from “who’s right” to “what’s right” for the project. ↳ Turn Conflict into Collaboration: Encourage solutions, not complaints. ↳ Use a Priority Framework: Rank tasks by urgency, impact, and effort. ↳ Be a Neutral Guide: Mediate, don’t dictate. Facilitate clarity and consensus. Handled well, disputes become opportunities for stronger teamwork, sharper focus, and better outcomes.
-
To resolve disputes over project priorities, I encourage open dialogue to understand all perspectives. I then align the team with overarching goals to refocus on what truly matters. Finally, I facilitate compromises or adjustments to ensure a balanced approach that meets key objectives while maintaining team cohesion.
-
When project priorities clash, I bring the team back to the overarching goals. I ask everyone to explain their perspective—not just the what, but the why behind their priorities. This often uncovers shared ground or deeper issues. Then, I guide the group to focus on impact: which tasks will drive the most value or unblock others? If there’s still disagreement, I make the final call and clearly explain my reasoning. The key is balancing fairness with decisiveness while ensuring everyone feels heard and aligned on the bigger picture.
-
To resolve disputes over project priorities, I would use the Weighted Scoring Framework to ensure clarity and alignment. ✅ Define clear criteria: ↳ Strategic Alignment-Supports key goals and objective ↳ Impact on Business–Prioritize high and immediate benefits. ↳ Urgency–Address time-sensitive tasks or deadlines. ↳ Effort vs. Impact–Focus on quick wins with minimal effort. ↳ Risks and Dependencies – Mitigate risks and manage dependencies. ↳ Stakeholder Support – Consider influence and backing from stakeholders. ✅ Assign weights and scores to each criterion. ✅ Rank projects objectively based on the weighted scores. This approach reduces subjectivity, enhances transparency, and ensures focus on the highest-value initiatives.
Rate this article
More relevant reading
-
TeamworkHere's how you can effectively communicate when struggling to meet a deadline.
-
Personal DevelopmentWhat do you do if your team is facing conflicting priorities in a complex work situation?
-
Board RelationsHow can board task forces deal with uncertainty and ambiguity in a changing environment?
-
Project LeadershipHow would you address a situation where a key stakeholder disagrees with the project sponsor's decision?