Our requirements document is approved, but users still disagree. Why?
Approval without shared understandingA signature may confirm process completion without confirming a common mental model. Use concrete examples, prototypes, and exception scenarios to expose remaining misunderstandings.
What to do now
- Select high-risk user journeys
- Walk through realistic examples
- Record disagreements as specific requirements
- Confirm corrected acceptance criteria
When to escalate
Escalate when
A discovered misunderstanding changes the approved delivery commitment.
Who decides
The scope owner and authorized sponsor
Example
An approved reimbursement requirement is clarified when a walkthrough reveals that partial claims were interpreted differently.
Mistake to avoid
Using the signed document to dismiss a genuine usability gap.
Prevent a repeat
Review ambiguous requirements and unresolved acceptance conditions before the affected work begins.
Suggested ApprovedFlow setup
- Projects
- Tasks
- Documents
- Approvals
Keep the agreed scope and acceptance evidence with the project; record any proposed change and its decision separately. See the platform
Related cases
- How can we manage scope when users discover needs during delivery?Evolving requirements
- We forgot nonfunctional requirements. What should we check now?Missing service-quality requirements
- We approved a change, but the team still uses the old plan. Why?Approval-to-execution gap
- We have a RACI matrix, but people still disagree about responsibility. Why?Responsibility model not applied