When confronted with conflicting feedback I generally use a framework that consists of these principles: - 80/20 rule: Design for 80% of the users - User testing: Build a prototype to test - A/B testing: Test two designs with distinctly different approaches - Tweak design to see if conflicting feedback can be synthesized

When I receive conflicting feedback on my design decisions, I first try to understand the concerns behind each opinion and identify areas of agreement. From there, I focus on the aligned aspects and, if necessary, conduct usability tests to validate decisions based on real user experiences. Ultimately, my goal is to find the best solution that balances user needs with the project’s objectives.

Usuário é quem usa; cliente é quem paga. Dito isso, esses usuários compõem o perfil de clientes? Se sim, é necessário realizar pesquisas voltadas para a remodelagem da IA. Se não, é preciso conduzir pesquisas focadas na descoberta de novas oportunidades de negócio. --- A user is the one who uses; a client is the one who pays. That being said, do these users match the client profile? If yes, research focused on AI remodeling is necessary. If not, research should focus on identifying new business opportunities.

The first step is to understand that feedback should be conflicting! Otherwise you haven't created a diverse feedback team. Think about it, if all the feedback is the same or consistent, maybe that reflects a lack of diversity and thought in your pool. Conflicting feedback is good. I'd start by thinking of universal design principles and how they apply to IA. If something is identified as being needed for a specific user population, universal design would say that it should be incorporated as it will benefit the whole user group as well.

Feedbacks are important, however always have pros and cons Do a details analysis of pro and cons. Try to align most of your pros with actual requirements. This method will enlighten you to be agile enough. Plan in phases .

When dealing with conflicting feedback on IA proposals, I focus on understanding everyone’s concerns and the priorities behind their input. I try to bring the discussion back to the users, revisiting research to see which approach best aligns with their needs. Sometimes, I create prototypes to test different ideas and let the data guide us. It’s all about staying flexible and focused on the shared goal: building an experience that works for both users and the business. By keeping the conversation collaborative and user-centered, we can find common ground and move forward.

Quite simply the IA conflicts occur when certain user flow doesn't take to user's desired location or it become complicated. The simple advice would be is to take a step back. Think about the overall map of the product and see if you made any mistake with goruping some information (placing something that doesn't belong there) and if that's all okay and it's a matter of finding a different route for the user.

I would invite some early adopters from our user community in to review the app and review specific functionality in question as choices within the app that answer users’ questions- then follow those choices. Software managers are not our customers.

If you have a good team and client, you're bound to run into opposing IA decisions. In most cases, we successfully agree on hierarchy by using the user's perspective and back it up with historical data. If we're not able to do that, usability tests to the intended audience are a great way to make these decisions.

It’s natural to receive differing feedback and part of the process of soliciting multiple perspectives. I would take in all these perspectives, distill them down, categorize them and reflect on them, focusing on the predefined audience, goals, and objectives. Iteration is key.’