PMP Process — Managing Technical Aspects Practice Question

Answer analysis

Option-by-option breakdown

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

• ✓

  Escalate the conflict to the functional managers of the developers

  Why this is correct

  Escalating the conflict to the functional managers is a necessary and appropriate step when direct resolution attempts by the Project Manager and the team have been unsuccessful. Functional managers possess hierarchical authority and a broader organizational perspective, enabling them to intervene, mediate, or make decisions that team members might not be empowered to make. This action helps to break impasses, ensuring the issue is addressed at the proper organizational level to prevent further project disruption and maintain team effectiveness.

• ✗

  Ignore the conflict and hope it resolves on its own

  Why it's wrong here

  Ignoring conflict is a passive and ineffective approach that often exacerbates the issue rather than resolving it. Unaddressed conflicts tend to fester and escalate, leading to decreased team morale, reduced productivity, and potential project delays, directly contradicting the Project Manager's responsibility to proactively manage team dynamics and ensure project success. A Project Manager must actively engage with and resolve conflicts to maintain a healthy project environment.

• ✓

  Facilitate a meeting between the developers to discuss and resolve the technical disagreement

  Why this is correct

  As a Project Manager, the primary responsibility is to facilitate open communication and collaboration within the team to resolve issues at the lowest possible level. By organizing a direct meeting, the Project Manager enables the developers to articulate their perspectives, understand the root causes of the disagreement, and collaboratively work towards a mutually acceptable technical solution. This approach fosters problem-solving skills and reinforces team autonomy, making it the most constructive initial step in conflict resolution.

• ✗

  Reprimand both developers publicly for causing disruption

  Why it's wrong here

  Publicly reprimanding team members is a highly detrimental approach that erodes trust, damages team morale, and fosters resentment rather than resolving the underlying conflict. This method is counterproductive, as it shames individuals, discourages future open communication, and fails to address the technical disagreement constructively. Such punitive actions ultimately harm team cohesion, reduce individual motivation, and impede overall project progress, making it an inappropriate conflict resolution technique.

• ✗

  Reassign one of the developers to another project

  Why it's wrong here

  Reassigning a developer is an extreme measure that should only be contemplated as a last resort when all other conflict resolution strategies have been exhausted and the conflict severely impedes project progress. This action incurs significant costs, including potential delays due to knowledge transfer and onboarding a replacement, and fails to address the root cause of the conflict. It also signals a failure in conflict management, potentially creating similar issues in future team compositions rather than resolving the underlying problem.

Go deeper

Related to this question