Navigating priority conflict and reaching a decision everyone can commit to.
Teams when priorities are contested, a decision is stalling, or the same ground keeps getting re-litigated.
Decision protocol and working template
90 minutes
You can't make a good decision by waiting for agreement. You make it by doing the thinking work first, then backing the choice, getting commitment, even if you disagree.
Conflict about priorities in leadership teams is rarely about values. It is about how to weight them in this moment, against this decision, with xyz constraints. The disagreement can be resolved, if the group agrees in advance on how to resolve it.
This protocol creates that agreement on the process and commitment to the outcome.
There is no right answer. There is only a decision made well.
Before You Start
Name who owns this call.
Even when the decision belongs to one person, the quality of that decision depends on what they heard in the room. This process exists to make sure they heard the right things.
Decision-holder:
[Name]Name the decision clearly. Two or three options maximum.
Option A: | |
Option B: | |
Option C (if needed): |
Step 1. Orient: Bias Check
10 minutes
Each person writes their answers individually before any discussion. Do not share until everyone has finished writing.
What am I most attached to here, and why?
What’s influencing the way I’m viewing each of the options, and why?
[E.g. past success/failure, motivations, information avaialbe, alternatives that have/have not been consdiered.]What would change my mind, and am I actually open to that?
Share briefly. The point is not to resolve bias. It is to name it so it does not run silently.
Step 2. Explore: Pre-Mortem
30 minutes [increase time for complexity and higher stakes issues]
Split the group. Each group takes one option.
Group A: Failure story It is 18 months from now. This option was the wrong call. Write the story. Why did it fail? What happened? Who was hurt? What did we miss?
[Notes]Group B: Success story Same option. 18 months from now. This was the right call. What shifted? What made it work? What did we do differently?
[Notes]Groups swap and repeat for the second option.
The aim is not to convince. It is to surface the best possible case for and against each option before anyone scores anything. Disagreement is structural here, not personal.
Key failure themes that surfaced:
Key success themes that surfaced:
Step 3. Score: Six Dimensions
15–20 minutes
Score silently and independently. No discussion until everyone has scored.
Rate each option 1 to 5 on each dimension. 1 = weak or unacceptable 3 = okay but tension 5 = strong / well supported
Dimension | Ask yourself | Option A | Option B |
1. Fit with purpose | How strongly does this move us toward what matters most right now? | ||
2. Non-negotiables | Does this stay within the boundaries we will not compromise? | ||
3. Values and identity | Does this reflect who we are and how we intend to operate? | ||
4. Capacity and trade-offs | What pressure, sacrifice, or displacement does this create elsewhere, and can we absorb it? | ||
5. Risk and reversibility | If this is wrong, how exposed are we and how strongly recoverable is it? | ||
✦ Global intuition | Setting analysis aside, how right or wrong does this feel overall? | ||
Total scores |
Where was there spread across the scores?
Notes
[Wide dispersion on a dimension signals unresolved conflict or a blind spot. Name it. That conversation is more useful than the number.]Step 4. Decide and Commit
10 minutes
The decision-holder makes the call, informed by everything above.
Name the decision out loud. Then each person repeats:
What I am willing to commit to is...
What I still disagree with is...
This is disagree and commit. Not agreement. Commitment to the process having been honest, and to supporting the decision publicly once it is made.
Determine the first action
Step 5. Set the Triggers
5 minutes
Before you leave, agree on what would bring you back. Concrete conditions.
We will reassess this decision if:
Trigger | Who watches for it |
This transforms the commitment from permanent to conditional.
Summary
Element | Decision |
Decision-holder | |
Options considered | |
Dimension with most spread | |
Decision made | |
First action | |
Reassess triggers |
🌿 Want to Go Deeper?
This is a standalone tool. It also supports Step 3 of the Strategic Orientation system Trade-offs and Choices and can be used whenever a priority conflict surfaces during the year.
To access the editable Notion templates for this and all other sprints and practice pages, request a copy of the editable templates.
🤝 Need Help With This?
This protocol works well as a self-facilitated team exercise once you have run it once with support.
Run it with your team. A facilitated Prioritisation Rhythm session brings your leadership team through the full protocol in real time. It surfaces the real conflict, moves through it, and lands a decision with genuine commitment behind it.
Talk it through first. Not sure if this is the right tool for what you are facing? A call is a good place to start.
Call, text, or email using the details at the top of this page.