PMP Practice Question: Business Environment: strategy and project benefits

Answer analysis

Option-by-option breakdown

For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.

• ✗

  Make a decision yourself based on your technical expertise to resolve the conflict quickly

  Why it's wrong here

  As a PMP, the project manager's role is often more about facilitation and leadership than technical dictation, especially in a hybrid environment where self-organizing teams are valued. Imposing a solution, even with technical expertise, bypasses team collaboration, potentially leading to a lack of ownership, decreased morale, and unresolved underlying issues between the developers. This approach fails to build team capability for future conflict resolution and can foster resentment.

• ✓

  Facilitate a meeting with both developers to discuss the pros and cons of each design and reach a consensus

  Why this is correct

  This option exemplifies a collaborative and problem-solving approach to conflict resolution, which is highly favored in project management, particularly in hybrid or agile contexts. By facilitating a discussion, the project manager empowers the senior developers to present their perspectives, critically evaluate options, and collectively arrive at a mutually agreeable solution. This not only resolves the immediate design conflict but also strengthens team communication, fosters a sense of ownership, and builds trust, aligning with PMI's emphasis on servant leadership and team empowerment.

• ✗

  Escalate the issue to the project sponsor for resolution

  Why it's wrong here

  Escalating a conflict between two senior developers directly to the project sponsor is generally premature and demonstrates a failure to leverage the project manager's own leadership and conflict resolution skills. The project manager is expected to first attempt to resolve issues at the lowest appropriate level, empowering the team to find solutions. Unnecessary escalation can undermine team autonomy, consume higher-level management's time, and reflect poorly on the project manager's ability to manage team dynamics effectively.

• ✗

  Replace one of the developers with a contractor to eliminate the conflict

  Why it's wrong here

  Replacing a senior developer with a contractor is an extreme and highly disruptive measure that should only be considered as a last resort after all other conflict resolution strategies have failed and the conflict is severely impacting project progress. This action does not address the underlying cause of the design disagreement and introduces new risks, such as loss of institutional knowledge, onboarding delays for the contractor, and potential negative impacts on team morale. It's a costly and inefficient way to "resolve" a conflict.

Go deeper

Related to this question