Resolving Conflicts
Handle conflicting requirements and overlapping compliance obligations.
Resolving Conflicts
When you're subject to multiple regulations or frameworks, conflicts can arise. This guide helps you identify and resolve conflicting or overlapping requirements.
Types of Conflicts
Direct Conflicts
Mutually exclusive requirements:
- One regulation requires X, another prohibits X
- Rare but can occur across jurisdictions
- Requires careful legal analysis
Overlap Conflicts
Same topic, different standards:
- Different retention periods
- Different encryption requirements
- Different breach notification timelines
Interpretation Conflicts
Ambiguous or unclear guidance:
- Vague regulatory language
- Conflicting expert interpretations
- Evolving best practices
True conflicts (where compliance with one means violating another) are rare. Most "conflicts" are actually overlapping requirements that can be harmonized.
Identifying Conflicts
Automatic Detection
PartnerAlly identifies potential conflicts:
- Control mapping overlaps
- Differing requirement specifications
- Framework version conflicts
Conflict Indicators
Conflicts appear in:
- Intelligence feed with conflict tag
- Gap analysis warnings
- Control comparison views
Manual Identification
Review for conflicts when:
- Enabling new frameworks
- Entering new markets/jurisdictions
- Major regulatory changes occur
Conflict Resolution Process
Identify the Conflict
Document both requirements clearly.
Analyze the Difference
Understand exactly what differs.
Determine Applicability
Confirm both actually apply to you.
Find Common Ground
Identify the stricter or overlapping requirement.
Document Decision
Record your resolution and rationale.
Implement Solution
Update controls and documentation.
Resolution Strategies
Apply the Stricter Standard
Most common resolution:
- Identify the more restrictive requirement
- Implement to that standard
- Satisfies both requirements
Example:
- GDPR: 72-hour breach notification
- HIPAA: 60-day breach notification
- Solution: Notify within 72 hours (satisfies both)
Jurisdiction-Based Approach
When requirements truly conflict:
- Apply jurisdiction-specific controls
- Segment by data location
- Document the approach
Example:
- EU data stays in EU
- US data follows US rules
- Clear separation maintained
Risk-Based Prioritization
When full compliance isn't possible:
- Assess risk of each approach
- Choose lower-risk option
- Document reasoning
- Accept residual risk formally
Seek Clarification
When interpretation is unclear:
- Request guidance from regulators
- Consult legal counsel
- Follow industry consensus
- Document position
Common Conflict Scenarios
Data Retention
Different frameworks require different periods:
| Framework | Typical Requirement |
|---|---|
| GDPR | Minimize, no longer than necessary |
| SOX | 7 years for financial records |
| HIPAA | 6 years from creation or last use |
| PCI DSS | 1 year of audit logs |
Resolution: Create a retention schedule that meets all requirements, typically using the longest period.
Encryption Standards
Different encryption requirements:
| Framework | Common Requirement |
|---|---|
| PCI DSS | TLS 1.2+ for transmission |
| HIPAA | Encryption addressed not specified |
| GDPR | "Appropriate" technical measures |
Resolution: Implement the most specific standard (e.g., TLS 1.3) to satisfy all.
Breach Notification
Different notification timelines:
| Jurisdiction | Timeline |
|---|---|
| GDPR (EU) | 72 hours to DPA |
| CCPA (California) | "Most expedient time possible" |
| HIPAA (US) | 60 days to individuals |
| State laws | Varies widely |
Resolution: Build process to meet shortest timeline, adjust notifications by jurisdiction.
Documenting Resolutions
What to Document
- The conflict identified
- Requirements from each source
- Analysis performed
- Resolution chosen
- Rationale for decision
- Implementation details
- Review date
Where to Document
- Intelligence conflict record
- Gap resolution notes
- Policy documents
- Risk register (if residual risk)
Conflict Monitoring
Ongoing Vigilance
Monitor for changes that might:
- Create new conflicts
- Resolve existing conflicts
- Change the best resolution approach
Review Triggers
Re-evaluate resolutions when:
- Regulations are updated
- Frameworks are revised
- New jurisdictions apply
- Auditor questions arise
Conflict resolutions aren't permanent. Review them when underlying requirements change.
Getting Help
Legal Consultation
For significant conflicts:
- Consult with legal counsel
- Get written guidance
- Document the advice
- Follow the recommendation
Industry Groups
Learn from peers:
- Industry associations
- Professional networks
- Compliance forums
- Peer benchmarking
Regulatory Guidance
When available:
- Request formal guidance
- Review published FAQs
- Follow safe harbors
- Document reliance
Best Practices
Proactive Management
- Map all applicable requirements
- Identify overlaps early
- Build harmonized controls
- Document your approach
Conservative Approach
When in doubt:
- Apply stricter standard
- Document your reasoning
- Review with legal
- Prepare for questions
Transparent Documentation
- Clear conflict identification
- Documented analysis
- Reasoned decisions
- Audit trail
Common Questions
What if regulations directly conflict?
True direct conflicts are rare. If they exist:
- Consult legal counsel immediately
- Understand exact conflict
- Assess which jurisdiction takes priority
- Consider operational changes
- Accept documented risk
How do I handle framework version conflicts?
When transitioning between versions:
- Understand transition timeline
- Meet current version requirements
- Plan for new version
- Avoid temporary non-compliance
Should I document conflicts I've resolved?
Yes, always document:
- Shows thoughtful analysis
- Supports audit discussions
- Enables consistent approach
- Creates institutional knowledge
Next Steps
- Changes - Track regulatory updates
- Sources - Configure sources
- Risk Registry - Document residual risks