Reconciliation under USPAP SR 1-6 is often treated as a technical step at the end of the appraisal process. In practice, it is far more than a mechanical exercise. True reconciliation is not about averaging numbers or following software defaults—it is about professional judgment under uncertainty.

USPAP requires appraisers to reconcile the quality and quantity of data, as well as the relevance and applicability of the valuation approaches used. This places reconciliation at the core of appraisal ethics, not just methodology. It is the moment where the appraiser must take responsibility not only for the final value conclusion, but for the reasoning that produced it.

From a philosophical perspective, reconciliation reflects what Søren Kierkegaard described as “becoming”: the transition from following procedures to standing personally behind one’s own choices. In this sense, reconciliation is an existential act. The appraiser cannot hide behind forms, templates, or algorithms. They must interpret conflicting evidence, assess uncertainty, and justify why certain data deserve greater credibility than others.

This shift moves appraisal away from mechanical form-filling and toward intellectual accountability.  Appraisers are not fiduciaries in the legal sense, but they are stewards of public trust. Their primary obligation is not loyalty to the client, but loyalty to professional judgment, independence, and truth-seeking.

Reconciliation is where data becomes knowledge, numbers become meaning, and appraisal becomes a genuinely ethical practice.