When team members disagree on priorities, forcing a decision won’t fix the real issue. The key is to bring them to the same page. Start with a conversation. Let both sides explain their views without interruptions. Many conflicts come from misunderstanding, not real differences. Go back to the big picture. What is the end goal? Aligning on common objectives makes it easier to find a way forward. Look for a middle ground. Can both adjust slightly to meet in the middle? A small compromise from both sides can lead to a stronger outcome. Good teamwork is not about winning arguments but finding solutions together.

The process of mediation becomes essential because priority disputes have the power to halt advancement. The first step requires separate interviews with each party to learn their specific concerns. Organize a joint session to help colleagues achieve consensus regarding shared goals as well as demonstrate how individual objectives fit into the larger organizational framework. Strike a middle ground by maintaining the equilibrium between vital and lasting project value. Two teammates resolved their speed-quality dispute when we implemented phased deadlines. Directing discussions with facts rather than emotional appeals helps the team focus on project achievements instead of individual preferences thus facilitating better teamwork.

Start by meeting with both team members to understand their perspectives and priorities. Highlight the shared goals of the project and find common ground. Facilitate a discussion to align their efforts, encouraging compromise where needed. Clarify roles, responsibilities, and timelines to avoid further conflict. Keep communication open and monitor progress to ensure collaboration improves.

When priorities clash, it’s rarely about the work—it’s about perspective. Each person sees their piece as the most critical, and honestly, that’s not a bad problem to have. Start by getting both sides in the same room and having them explain, not defend, their stance. The goal is understanding, not a debate. Then, zoom out. Remind them that the real priority isn’t who “wins” but what best serves the project. Facilitate a compromise that respects both viewpoints without derailing progress. When people feel heard, they’re far more willing to meet in the middle. The ship sails smoother when everyone rows in sync.

As a consultant, the source of truth is the sponsor, so we would default to their stated needs. In situations where two, equally compelling consultant project team members disagree about priorities, we have consultant only meetings to work through the different perspectives so as to present a unified from to the client.