I went with the obvious answer about aligning on data and getting stakeholders involved, but it felt a bit rehearsed coming out.
Frame conflict as a healthy part of product development and focus on how you align around shared goals and data. Describe a specific process you use to understand the other PM's perspective, evaluate options objectively, and reach a decision—even if it means disagreeing and committing. Emphasize that the outcome is better product decisions and stronger relationships.
Pro tip: Show that you can disagree without being disagreeable: mention that you explicitly separate the person from the problem and often pre-agree on a decision-making framework (e.g., RAPID or DACI) to avoid ad-hoc battles.
Start by asking questions and actively listening to understand the other PM's reasoning, data, and underlying interests. Acknowledge their perspective to build trust.
Re-anchor the discussion on common objectives—customer value, company strategy, or OKRs—to depersonalize the conflict and create a basis for evaluation.
Use objective criteria such as user research, metrics, A/B tests, or a decision-making framework (e.g., RICE, weighted scoring) to compare options. If data is inconclusive, consider running a small experiment.
If consensus isn't reached, escalate to a designated decision-maker (e.g., Director of Product) with a clear summary of trade-offs. Once a decision is made, commit fully and support it publicly.
After the decision, follow up to see how it played out and capture learnings. Strengthen the relationship by thanking the other PM for their input and discussing how to work together better next time.
AI-generated suggestions, not part of the candidate's original notes. May be inaccurate — verify before relying on them.