Resolve conflicting priorities between employees

When employees receive conflicting priorities, put the requests on one list and ask the authorised decision-maker to choose the order. Compare deadlines, consequences, dependencies and available capacity, then tell everyone affected what will move. Record the reason so employees do not have to negotiate the same conflict again when another requester follows up.

This guide deals with ordinary sequencing: two reasonable work requests need the same person’s time. It helps an owner make the trade-off visible. Allegations about conduct, an immediate safety issue or a disputed employment instruction need the appropriate process rather than a quick ranking exercise.

Ask what makes each request urgent

“I need it today” can mean a customer is waiting, a colleague cannot proceed or the requester would simply prefer it finished. Ask for the actual deadline and the consequence of waiting. Avoid assuming that the loudest or most senior requester has the strongest reason.

Record dependencies too. A task might take only ten minutes once information arrives but be impossible to complete now. Business Queensland’s management and leadership guide supports explaining decisions and involving employees. The comparison method here is an original planning aid, not a universal scoring rule.

Request	Deadline and consequence	Effort / dependency	Owner’s decision
Confirm tomorrow’s bookings	Noon: customers need a confirmed time	30 minutes; approved times available	1. Jo completes first
Prepare supplier query	2 pm: needed for an owner decision	20 minutes; two details missing	2. Alex finds details; Jo prepares query next
Tidy archived labels	Friday: useful housekeeping	40 minutes; no other work depends on it today	3. Priya moves it to an agreed later slot

Original ASBG worksheet using fictional records. The labelled rows provide the text equivalent. Keep the assumptions and sources with a printed copy.

Make the capacity trade-off explicit

The requests total 90 minutes: 30 plus 20 plus 40. There are 60 minutes available, so “do all three” is not an adequate instruction. Completing the first two uses 50 minutes and leaves ten minutes unallocated. The 40-minute tidy-up needs another slot; it does not fit simply because it is ranked third.

These estimates are fictional. In your own list, ask the employee whether they are realistic and allow for work you have not captured. If the supplier details do not arrive, Priya needs to decide what Jo should do next. Do not leave Jo waiting indefinitely on a blocked task while still being judged against the original order.

Name one person who resolves the conflict

The decision-maker needs appropriate authority over the competing work. If two managers cannot agree, use the business’s escalation route. Asking the employee to keep both people happy leaves the employee with the same conflicting instructions.

Write a brief decision: “Bookings first because customers need confirmed times by noon. Supplier query follows once Alex supplies the details. Archive work moves to Friday; Priya will tell its requester.” That explanation is easier to use than a row of red urgency labels.

Tell the people whose work will wait

The owner or agreed decision-maker should communicate the changed order. Confirm the revised date with the requester rather than silently editing a task. Keep a record of any dependency or customer commitment that changes the decision.

If information must pass to another employee, the role-handover guide shows how to include the current position and next action. A new starter may need the decision route explained in their learning plan.

Revisit the order when the facts change

Agree what would trigger another decision: a customer changes the deadline, missing information arrives late or the task takes substantially longer than expected. Employees should know who to ask and which existing decision to refer to.

If the same conflict recurs every week, review where requests enter the business and who allocates capacity. One shared intake list may be enough for a small office. Use managing a small team to find related coordination guides.

Key takeaways

• Compare deadlines, consequences, dependencies and actual task capacity.
• Have an authorised person choose and explain the trade-off.
• Tell affected requesters and revisit the decision when facts change.

Request / requester:
Deadline and reason:
Consequence of waiting:
Input or decision needed first:
Estimated effort / available task time:
Decision-maker / agreed order:
Work deferred or reassigned:
Who tells each requester:
Revisit if / review time:

Sources checked 23 September 2026. Check the assumptions before using these notes.
Managing and leading in a small business: https://www.business.qld.gov.au/running-business/employing/management-leadership

Where to get help

• Managing and leading in a small business