The answer is to coach the senior developer on effective mentoring techniques and the importance of allowing the junior to contribute. This is correct because the root cause lies in the senior’s dominating behavior, not the junior’s ability; coaching addresses the imbalance directly, fostering balanced pair programming where knowledge transfer and collaboration thrive. On the PMP exam, this tests your grasp of servant leadership and team development within a hybrid approach, where the project manager facilitates rather than dictates. A common trap is choosing to reassign tasks or pair the junior with someone else, which avoids the core issue and wastes a coaching opportunity. Remember the memory tip: “Coach the coach, don’t swap the pair”—fix the behavior, not the team composition.
PMP People — Leading Projects Practice Question
This PMP practice question tests your understanding of people — leading projects. Read the scenario carefully and evaluate each option against the stated constraints before committing to an answer. After answering, compare your reasoning against the explanation and wrong-answer breakdown below. Once you have made your selection, read the full explanation to reinforce the concept and understand why each distractor is designed to mislead on exam day.
You are managing a project using a hybrid approach. The team has a mix of senior and junior members. A senior developer is consistently dominating pair programming sessions, leaving the junior developer passive. The junior's performance is declining. What is the BEST action?
Clue words in this question
Noticing these words before you look at the options changes how you read each choice.
Clue: "best"
Why it matters: Signals that multiple options may be partially correct. Choose the option that most directly solves the exact problem described, not the one that sounds most complete.
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
Coach the senior developer on effective mentoring techniques and the importance of allowing the junior to contribute
Option C is correct because the root cause is the senior developer's behavior, not the junior's ability. Coaching the senior on effective mentoring techniques addresses the imbalance directly, fostering a collaborative environment where the junior can actively participate and learn. This aligns with the PMP's focus on servant leadership and team development in a hybrid approach, where pair programming relies on balanced contribution for knowledge transfer and code quality.
Key principle: Answer the scenario, not the keyword: identify the specific constraint before choosing the most familiar-sounding option.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
✗
Ask the junior developer to speak up more during pairing
Why it's wrong here
This places the burden on the junior and may not be effective if the senior dominates.
✗
Reassign the junior developer to work independently on simpler tasks
Why it's wrong here
This avoids the issue and loses the learning opportunity.
✓
Coach the senior developer on effective mentoring techniques and the importance of allowing the junior to contribute
Why this is correct
Coaching aligns with servant leadership and develops the team's capabilities.
Clue confirmation
The clue word "best" in the question point toward this answer.
Related concept
Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer.
✗
Pair the junior developer with a different senior developer
Why it's wrong here
This may be a temporary fix but does not address the senior developer's behavior.
Common exam traps
Common exam trap: answer the scenario, not the keyword
The trap here is that candidates often choose to reassign or swap team members (options B or D) as a quick fix, failing to recognize that coaching the senior developer is the most effective long-term solution for team development and conflict resolution.
Detailed technical explanation
How to think about this question
In pair programming, the driver-navigator roles require active participation from both members to ensure code quality and knowledge transfer; a dominant senior can create a 'rubber duck' scenario where the junior disengages, leading to technical debt from missed review insights. Coaching the senior on techniques like 'ping-pong pairing' or timed role-switching can rebalance contributions, directly improving team velocity and reducing rework. This approach also aligns with the PMP's emphasis on addressing team dysfunctions through coaching rather than administrative reassignments.
KKey Concepts to Remember
Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer.
Find the constraint that changes the correct option.
Eliminate answers that are true in general but not in this case.
TExam Day Tips
→Watch for words such as best, first, most likely and least administrative effort.
→Review why wrong options are wrong, not only why the correct option is correct.
Key takeaway
Answer the scenario, not the keyword: identify the specific constraint before choosing the most familiar-sounding option.
Real-world example
How this comes up in practice
A small business has 20 workstations on the 192.168.1.0/24 network and one public IP from its ISP. The router uses PAT (NAT overload) so all 20 devices share one public address using different source ports. NAT questions test whether you understand the four address terms and which direction each translation applies.
Related glossary terms
Concepts from this question explained
These glossary pages explain the core terms tested in this PMP question in full detail.
People — Leading Projects — This question tests People — Leading Projects — Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer..
What is the correct answer to this question?
The correct answer is: Coach the senior developer on effective mentoring techniques and the importance of allowing the junior to contribute — Option C is correct because the root cause is the senior developer's behavior, not the junior's ability. Coaching the senior on effective mentoring techniques addresses the imbalance directly, fostering a collaborative environment where the junior can actively participate and learn. This aligns with the PMP's focus on servant leadership and team development in a hybrid approach, where pair programming relies on balanced contribution for knowledge transfer and code quality.
What should I do if I get this PMP question wrong?
Identify which exam domain this question belongs to, review the core concept, then practise similar questions from the same domain.
Are there clue words in this question I should notice?
Yes — watch for: "best". Signals that multiple options may be partially correct. Choose the option that most directly solves the exact problem described, not the one that sounds most complete.
What is the key concept behind this question?
Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer.
About these practice questions
Courseiva creates original exam-style practice questions with explanations and wrong-answer analysis. It does not publish real exam questions, exam dumps, or protected exam content. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
Share a tip, memory trick, or ask about the reasoning behind this question. Do not post real exam questions, leaked content, braindumps, or copyrighted exam material. Comments are moderated and may be removed without notice.
This PMP practice question is part of Courseiva's free PMI certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the PMP exam.
Question Discussion
Share a tip, memory trick, or ask about the reasoning behind this question. Do not post real exam questions, leaked content, braindumps, or copyrighted exam material. Comments are moderated and may be removed without notice.
Sign in to join the discussion.