Aglet

Triage conflicting customer feedback without choosing sides

Conflicting requests are not automatically noise or a voting contest. Triage should establish what each customer is trying to accomplish, which constraints produce the difference, and whether the requests can coexist. Preserve both sides until the product question is clear.

Establish what is happening

  1. State each desired outcome

    Rewrite every request as an observable outcome with the relevant workflow, actor, and constraint. Avoid framing one request as the default. Record whether the conflict concerns speed, control, visibility, policy, or another concrete tradeoff.

  2. Segment the evidence

    Compare account type, role, plan-independent workflow needs, volume, region, device, and operating context where available. Use only permitted, non-sensitive context. Mark assumptions separately from observed differences and note which segment evidence is missing.

  3. Test coexistence options

    Ask whether configuration, separate defaults, permissions, or a clearer workflow could satisfy both outcomes. If choices are mutually exclusive, document the exact product tradeoff and the customers affected. Do not resolve the conflict by silently discarding the smaller segment.

What to carry forward

The output is a conflict brief that names both outcomes, the segments or constraints behind them, and the boundary between compatible and incompatible solutions. If the evidence does not identify the segment difference, keep the requests unresolved and assign a focused discovery question.

Keep the decision with the work.

Use a Work Item in Aglet to record the problem, the evidence you have, and the next decision. Add an owner and priority, then keep updates in the discussion so the next person can follow the reasoning.

Create an account See the product workflow