A clerk and a developer on the benefits-portal team clash over whether resident privacy must trump click-through speed. What source of conflict is this?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
"Faster clicks" versus "do not leak a resident's case" is not a missing stopwatch. Those are values. A load-time chart will not pick the city's duty of care.
Full Explanation
When a clerk and a developer on a benefits-portal team clash over whether resident privacy must trump click-through speed, the source is a values conflict—privacy versus speed—that needs different handling than a simple fact gap. Values conflicts require surfacing principles, constraints, and trade-offs, not pretending one metric dissolves ethics for municipal benefits. Treating it as a missing spreadsheet of page-load times assumes facts alone settle a privacy principle residents rely on. Calling it a personality mismatch for HR to solve by separating people avoids the civic values conversation and often restarts it with new faces. Asking the RTE to rewrite a PI Objective so privacy is no longer discussed erases the conflict by decree. Exam caveat: SASM distinguishes values conflicts from facts and interpersonal sources; privacy-versus-speed is classic values work for a team coach. Operational check: name the values explicitly, bring legal/privacy constraints into the room as objective criteria, search for options that protect privacy while improving perceived speed where lawful, and document the chosen principle in acceptance criteria. Verify the next portal stories still honor the privacy interest under delivery pressure and that neither party is punished for raising it.