PMP People — Leading Projects Practice Question
Your agile project team is experiencing conflicts between two developers regarding coding standards. The conflict is affecting team morale and productivity. As the project manager, which TWO actions should you take?
⚠ Common exam trap
Test-takers frequently confuse the project manager's role as a decision-maker with the agile principle of servant leadership, leading them to choose option C (deciding the standard themselves) or option D (escalating to managers), when the correct approach is to facilitate team consensus as in options A and E.
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
✓
Encourage the team to collaboratively define a coding standard that everyone agrees on
Option A is correct because in an agile environment, self-organizing teams should collaboratively establish their own working agreements, including coding standards, which builds ownership and reduces future conflict. Option E is correct because a project manager should first facilitate a meeting with both developers to understand their perspectives, which addresses the root cause of the conflict and supports team morale and productivity. Option B is wrong because removing developers is a punitive action that does not resolve the underlying conflict and damages team stability. Option C is wrong because imposing a standard unilaterally undermines the agile principle of team self-organization and may worsen resistance. Option D is wrong because escalating to functional managers bypasses the team's ability to resolve the issue and is premature before attempting direct facilitation.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✓
Encourage the team to collaboratively define a coding standard that everyone agrees on
Why this is correct
In agile, empowering the self-organizing team to collaboratively define their own working agreements, such as coding standards, is a highly effective conflict resolution strategy. This approach fosters a strong sense of ownership and commitment among team members, as they are directly involved in creating the solution. By reaching a consensus, the team builds a shared understanding and mutual respect, which significantly reduces future conflicts and improves adherence to the agreed-upon standards. This aligns with agile values of individuals and interactions over processes and tools.
- ✗
Remove the developers from the project to avoid further conflict
Why it's wrong here
Removing developers from the project is an extreme and generally counterproductive measure for conflict resolution, especially for disagreements over technical standards. This action leads to a significant loss of project knowledge and experience, disrupts team dynamics, and negatively impacts project velocity and morale. A PMP's role is to facilitate resolution and foster a productive environment, not to eliminate team members as a first or even early resort, which could be seen as an avoidance tactic rather than true resolution.
- ✗
Decide on a coding standard yourself and enforce it
Why it's wrong here
As an agile project manager, unilaterally deciding on and enforcing a coding standard is an autocratic approach that undermines the principles of self-organizing teams and shared ownership. While it might offer a quick fix, it often leads to resentment, reduced buy-in, and passive resistance from the developers, as they were not involved in the decision-making process. This diminishes team autonomy and misses an opportunity to build consensus and improve team collaboration through shared problem-solving.
- ✗
Escalate the conflict to the functional managers of the developers
Why it's wrong here
Escalating the conflict to functional managers prematurely bypasses the project team's ability to self-organize and resolve internal issues, which is a core agile principle. A project manager's primary responsibility is to facilitate conflict resolution within the team, providing support and tools for them to work through disagreements. Escalation should only be considered after the project manager has exhausted all reasonable attempts to mediate and facilitate a resolution directly with the involved parties, as it can disempower the team.
- ✓
Facilitate a meeting with both developers to understand their perspectives
Why this is correct
Facilitating a direct meeting with the involved developers is a crucial first step in conflict resolution, demonstrating the project manager's role as a servant leader. This approach allows for active listening and a deep understanding of each individual's perspective, underlying concerns, and the rationale behind their preferred coding standards. By creating a safe space for open dialogue, the project manager can help identify common ground or areas for compromise, laying the foundation for a collaborative and mutually acceptable solution.
Visual reference
Go deeper
Related to this question
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 →
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.