First Step in Conflict Resolution: Meet Separately and Facilitate Joint Discussion
You are managing a hybrid project with a critical deliverable due in two weeks. Two senior developers on your team have a strong disagreement over the technical approach. They have stopped speaking to each other, and the team's progress has stalled. What should you do FIRST?
Quick Answer
Meeting with each developer separately before bringing them together is correct because effective conflict resolution starts with genuinely understanding each party's position, and that understanding is much harder to reach in a joint setting where two people who have stopped speaking to each other are unlikely to open up candidly. The private conversations let the project manager hear the technical reasoning and any underlying frustration behind each position without either developer feeling like they have to perform or defend themselves in front of the other, which surfaces the real substance of the disagreement. Only after gathering that context does a joint discussion become productive, since the project manager can then facilitate a conversation grounded in what actually matters to each side rather than starting from a cold, tense standoff. This sequence respects both people's perspectives while still moving toward a resolution the two of them help shape, rather than the project manager simply picking a technical direction and imposing it, which could resolve the immediate deadline pressure but leave the underlying friction and disengagement intact. Whenever a scenario describes two individuals who have become entrenched or have stopped communicating directly, look for the answer that starts with individual, private engagement to understand each perspective before attempting any joint resolution, especially when time pressure might tempt you to skip straight to a decision.
⚠ Common exam trap
PMI often tests the misconception that a project manager should immediately impose a solution or escalate to authority, but the PMP framework emphasizes that the first step is always to facilitate communication and understand the conflict's root cause before taking any directive action.
Answer choices
Why each option matters
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
Meet with each developer separately to understand their perspectives and facilitate a joint discussion
As a project manager, your first responsibility in a conflict is to understand each party's perspective individually and then facilitate a collaborative resolution. This approach aligns with the PMP's 'Manage Conflict' process, which emphasizes direct, respectful communication before escalating or imposing solutions. By meeting separately and then jointly, you address the root cause—the technical disagreement—while preserving team cohesion and ownership of the solution.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
Enforce a team policy that all technical decisions must be approved by you
Why it's wrong here
Imposing unilateral control undermines team autonomy and may not address the root cause.
- ✗
Escalate the issue to the project sponsor for resolution
Why it's wrong here
Escalating to the sponsor bypasses the project manager’s responsibility to first attempt conflict resolution using interpersonal skills, such as facilitated negotiation or a direct one-on-one discussion with the developers. This option is tempting because escalation is appropriate when the issue exceeds the PM’s authority or budget, or when the disagreement involves a stakeholder outside the team. However, here the conflict is internal and resolvable without sponsor involvement.
- ✗
Reassign the work to other team members to avoid further conflict
Why it's wrong here
Reassigning the work sidesteps the disagreement rather than resolving it, losing the senior developers' expertise on a critical two-week deliverable and leaving the underlying conflict intact. It is tempting to protect the schedule, and would fit a genuine capability gap, but the stem requires addressing the conflict itself first.
- ✓
Meet with each developer separately to understand their perspectives and facilitate a joint discussion
Why this is correct
Meeting each developer separately, then facilitating a joint discussion, addresses the interpersonal conflict before it further stalls the critical deliverable. This satisfies the stem's two-week constraint by resolving the root disagreement through collaboration, rather than escalating, forcing a decision or imposing a technical approach.
Go deeper
Related to this question
Learn chapter
Leading Teams and Empowering Team Members
Key term
Project Management Plan
A formal, approved document that defines how a project is executed, monitored, controlled, and closed, serving as the single source of truth for the project team.
Key term
Organizational Change Management
Organizational Change Management (OCM) is the structured approach to preparing, supporting, and guiding people through changes in an organization to ensure lasting success.
About these practice questions
Courseiva writes every PMP question from scratch — 820 in total, each with an explanation and a wrong-answer breakdown. None are copied from real exams or dumps. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
Same concept, more angles
2 more ways this is tested on PMP
These questions test the same concept from different angles. Work through them to make sure you can recognise it however the exam phrases it.
Variation 1. You are managing a hybrid project with a co-located core team and remote subject matter experts. Two senior developers argue daily about the technical approach for a critical module. The conflict is delaying sprint planning and affecting team morale. Which TWO actions should you take first?
hard- A.Reassign one developer to a different module to reduce interaction
- ✓ B.Facilitate a private meeting between the two developers to understand their perspectives and guide them toward a resolution
- C.Ignore the conflict and hope it resolves on its own
- D.Escalate the issue to the project sponsor for a decision
- ✓ E.Review and reinforce the team charter with the team, emphasizing agreed-upon behavioral norms
Why B: Option B is correct because a private facilitated meeting is the standard first step in conflict management: it lets the two senior developers air their perspectives in a safe setting and lets the project manager guide them toward a collaborative resolution, which directly addresses the sprint-planning delay and morale problem. Option E is correct because reviewing and reinforcing the team charter re-anchors the team on agreed behavioral norms and ground rules, which is a preventive, team-level action appropriate when recurring interpersonal friction threatens team cohesion. Option A is not appropriate as a first action because reassigning a developer merely avoids the conflict, removes a key contributor from a critical module, and does not resolve the underlying technical disagreement. Option C is wrong because ignoring conflict lets it escalate and further damage morale and schedule. Option D is premature: escalating to the sponsor for a decision bypasses the project manager's responsibility to facilitate resolution and undermines team ownership.
Variation 2. A project manager is leading a cross-functional team where two key members have conflicting priorities. One member insists on following a strict process, while the other wants to expedite delivery. The project manager needs to resolve the conflict to keep the project on track. Which approach is most effective?
medium- A.Enforce the strict process to ensure quality.
- B.Suggest a compromise where both give up some requirements.
- ✓ C.Facilitate a meeting to discuss both perspectives and find a solution that meets core needs.
- D.Ignore the conflict and hope it resolves itself.
Why C: Facilitating a meeting to discuss both perspectives aligns with the PMP's 'Manage Conflict' process under the 'People' domain. This collaborative approach, known as 'collaborating' or 'problem-solving,' seeks a win-win solution that addresses the core needs of both team members—ensuring quality while meeting delivery timelines—without forcing a compromise that dilutes value or ignoring the issue.
JA
Written by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
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.