For resolving these conflicts, you have to conduct open discussion, take various viewpoints on procedure of security as on the which assests we have to prioritize, which threat we have to consider, which solution is better for our company based on resources as well as cost consideration etc. Then finally apply a efficient framework based on their suggestion.

To resolve the conflict, you need to first discuss with your team about what threat should be prioritised. This is so that everyone would have the chance to discuss about this in front of others involved. You need to also make sure that any decisions made are obtained through accurate analysis of data. This is to ensure that the decision made is the right one. You should also make sure that the process of analyzing the threats are made transparent to all of the team members. This is to avoid any disputes later on.

Establishing a unified framework is essential for effective threat management in cybersecurity. Start by creating a clear, agreed-upon process for prioritizing threats based on their potential impact and likelihood. Use a risk matrix or scoring system to categorize threats, ensuring alignment across teams. Incorporate input from all stakeholders to foster collaboration and address organizational priorities. Regularly review and update the framework to adapt to emerging risks and evolving business needs. By standardizing this approach, you enable focused resource allocation, quicker decision-making, and a stronger, more cohesive defense strategy.

In my experience as a vCISO, resolving conflicts over cybersecurity threat priorities starts with aligning the team on shared goals. I once faced a situation where developers prioritized uptime over fixing vulnerabilities, while the security team pushed for immediate patches. We organized a meeting to discuss the potential impact of each threat using real-world examples and risk assessments. By focusing on data—quantifying the risks and their business impact—we found common ground. The key was fostering collaboration, not competition, and ensuring everyone understood how their priorities fit into the larger picture of organizational security. Clear communication and compromise made all the difference.