What you can use
Turn incompatible client comments into one clear decision with a filled feedback matrix, a decision log and an email asking the agreed approver to choose.
SOLOHATCH FIELD GUIDE · OFFERS AND CLIENTS
When client feedback conflicts, identify the exact choice that cannot be made both ways, compare the options with the agreed purpose, and ask the confirmed decision owner to choose. Keep the affected work open until that choice is clear. Continue work that does not depend on it.
This guide concerns incompatible comments on one deliverable already in progress. It helps you turn “two people want different things” into a question the client can answer.
Check that the comments actually conflict
Put the comments beside the same file and version. One person may be reviewing yesterday’s draft while another is referring to an older layout. Confirm the location and requested change before treating their comments as incompatible.
Write the conflict as one decision: “Which action should the only primary button support?” is more useful than “The client disagrees about the email.” Keep each person’s stated reason alongside their request. Avoid guessing that a stakeholder dislikes the work or is trying to take control.
Separate three situations:
- A correction: a supplied date is wrong. Check the approved source and correct the mismatch.
- A direction choice: two comments require different priorities in the same space. Make that trade-off explicit.
- Additional work: resolving the disagreement would require another deliverable or a changed brief. Assess it through the scope change response process.
Do not make a client vote on a factual error as though it were a design preference. Equally, an unverified factual claim needs a source before it becomes the basis for either option.
Put the competing requests into a small matrix
Illustrative example: a freelance copywriter is preparing one welcome email for a fictional pottery studio. The agreed purpose is to help new subscribers find an introductory class. Email v3 has one primary button. The programme coordinator wants it to lead to class bookings; the studio founder wants it to lead to the studio’s story.
The following matrix is an editorial planning aid. It does not represent customer research or measured email performance.
| Request | Reason supplied | Effect on the agreed purpose | Decision needed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Programme coordinator: use “Find an introductory class”. | Give new subscribers a direct route to available classes. | Supports the recorded first action; class information must be current. | Is choosing a class still the priority? |
| Founder: use “Read our story”. | Explain the studio’s background before asking readers to book. | Makes the story the first destination; changes the route to class information. | Should the welcome email’s first action change? |
Both comments may describe useful material. They still require a choice about prominence. Adding every request to the opening does not explain which action should lead.
Offer options you can describe and deliver. Here, option A keeps class selection as the primary button and includes a short introduction to the studio. Option B makes the story the main destination and places class information in a secondary text link. Check that the approved material and agreed scope support either arrangement before offering it.
Confirm who can make this decision
A person collecting comments may not be the person authorised to choose the final direction. Check the review arrangement rather than inferring authority from job title, message length or who replied last.
Atlassian’s DACI framework separates the person coordinating a decision, people contributing information and the approver. A small client project can use that distinction without adopting a new tool or a full team process.
If the authority is unclear, ask your contact who should confirm the choice. Preserve relevant input from both stakeholders; do not quietly remove the inconvenient comment from the record. The revision-round planning guide helps establish a feedback contact and review purpose before the next stage.
Send a request that names the trade-off
Give the decision owner the current version, the two options and your recommendation with its reason. Ask for an explicit choice. The email below continues the fictional studio example.
Subject: Welcome email v3 — primary button decision Hi Rowan, The comments on welcome email v3 suggest two different destinations for its primary button: A. Introductory classes first, with a short studio introduction. B. The studio story first, with a secondary link to classes. The current brief prioritises helping new subscribers find an introductory class. I recommend A on that basis. Please confirm A or B, or tell me if the priority has changed. If someone else needs to approve this, please name that person. I can check the approved class details and the email links while this is open. I will leave the primary button and affected opening copy unchanged until the choice is confirmed. After confirmation, I will check the remaining work and timing. Thanks, [Name]
Adapt the message to the actual arrangement. A recommendation is not approval. Do not add a new fee, an automatic acceptance deadline or a promise that either option will perform better.
If the client cannot decide because information is missing, name that information and who will provide it. A timing problem then belongs in the missing-feedback workflow; it does not justify guessing the answer.
Keep the decision with the working version
Use one short record for the unresolved choice. Update it when the agreed approver actually responds, keeping the earlier options visible.
DECISION ID: WE-01 DELIVERABLE / VERSION: Welcome email v3 QUESTION: Which destination should the primary button support? BASELINE PURPOSE: Help subscribers find an introductory class OPTIONS: A — class selection first / B — studio story first RECOMMENDATION AND REASON: A, matching the current brief PERSON CONFIRMING THE CHOICE: Rowan, confirmed client approver CURRENT STATE: Open; no choice received UNAFFECTED WORK: Check approved class details and existing links NEXT ACTION: Request explicit A/B choice or revised priority AFTER A RESPONSE — FICTIONAL CONTINUATION CONFIRMED CHOICE: A SOURCE: Rowan's reply on the project thread, decision WE-01 WORKING VERSION: Prepare email v4 with class-selection button STILL OPEN: Confirm the supplied class dates are current PEOPLE TO INFORM: Founder and programme coordinator
The recorded choice settles the button direction. It does not settle the open class-date check or approve an additional email sequence. Name those separately if they arise.
Check the revised deliverable against the choice
Before returning the file, compare the changed section with the decision record and check that unrelated content remains accurate. Tell the client which version incorporates the choice and identify anything still open.
If later feedback reverses the decision, record that as a new decision against the current version. Assess its effect using the actual project scope and review arrangement.
Start with one disputed choice, one confirmed decision owner and one record. Explore Offers and Clients for the surrounding proposal and review steps, or return to all SoloHatch guides.
This guide was developed with AI assistance for SoloHatch, operated by My Target Limited. Examples are illustrative, and planning templates should be adapted to your project. About SoloHatch.