Describe a situation where you had to resolve a conflict between the security architecture team and the development team over implementing a new encryption standard. How did you handle it and what was the outcome?

Use the STAR framework. 1) Situation: brief context of the conflict. 2) Task: your responsibility to mediate. 3) Action: step‑by‑step strategy – identify stakeholders, map risk vs. business impact, propose a phased encryption rollout, negotiate trade‑offs, secure executive buy‑in, document decisions, and set up monitoring. 4) Result: measurable improvement in compliance score or reduction in vulnerability count. 120‑150 words.

When the development team pushed for a quick rollout of a legacy AES‑128 cipher, I recognized the PCI‑DSS requirement for AES‑256. I organized a cross‑functional workshop to surface concerns, mapped the risk impact, and drafted a phased migration plan that preserved existing code while upgrading new services. I secured executive approval by presenting a cost‑benefit analysis that showed a 25% reduction in potential breach cost. The plan was implemented over two sprints, resulting in a 100% compliance score and a 30% faster deployment than a full rewrite. The experience reinforced the importance of stakeholder alignment and transparent risk communication.