Use this when

Several sources hold the same kind of knowledge and sometimes disagree, and you need a consistent way to decide which one wins.

The pattern

TOPIC: refund policy
  1. HR-approved policy (system of record)   ← wins
  2. Team wiki summary
  3. Old intranet page                       ← superseded

For each topic, put the sources in a ranked order of trust. When they conflict, the higher-ranked source wins. When the top source is silent, fall back to the next.

Why it works

Most source conflicts are not genuine dilemmas; they are an outdated copy disagreeing with a current one. A clear ranking resolves those automatically and consistently, for both people and AI, so nobody has to re-litigate which document to trust each time.

How to apply it

  1. For each important topic, identify the authoritative source and rank the rest.
  2. Base the ranking on ownership, currency and officialness.
  3. Encode the rule: on conflict, prefer the higher-ranked source.
  4. Reserve high-stakes conflicts for a person, rather than resolving them purely by rank. See how to handle conflicting sources.

Good fit

  • Knowledge duplicated across official and informal sources.
  • Retrieval systems that might otherwise return whichever passage matches the wording best.

Poor fit

  • A single, well-owned source per topic, where no ranking is needed.

What this does not solve

Ranking sources decides which to believe; it does not make the top source correct, and it should not silently override a high-stakes disagreement that deserves a human. Use it for routine conflicts, and escalate the ones that matter.