PMP People — Leading Projects 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.

• ✗

  Remove both team members from the project.

  Why it's wrong here

  Removing team members is an extreme and costly measure that should only be considered as a last resort when all other conflict resolution techniques have failed, or if the conflict poses an immediate and severe threat to project success or team safety. Premature removal incurs significant costs related to recruitment, onboarding, and potential project delays, while also failing to address the root cause of the conflict, which could resurface with new team members. This action demonstrates a lack of leadership in managing team dynamics.

• ✓

  Meet with each team member individually to understand their perspectives.

  Why this is correct

  This initial step aligns with the 'Withdraw/Avoid' or 'Smooth/Accommodate' conflict resolution techniques, but primarily serves as a crucial information-gathering phase. By meeting individually, the project manager can create a safe space for each team member to express their concerns, perceptions, and underlying interests without the pressure of direct confrontation, thereby uncovering the true root causes of the conflict and building rapport before attempting a joint resolution. This approach demonstrates active listening and empathy, essential leadership skills.

• ✗

  Escalate the conflict to the project sponsor.

  Why it's wrong here

  Escalating to the sponsor bypasses the project manager’s responsibility to directly manage team conflict using interpersonal and team management skills, as prescribed by the PMBOK Guide’s leadership domain. This action fails because the scenario describes a low-level interpersonal dispute, not a strategic issue beyond the project manager’s authority. It is tempting because escalation is correct when the conflict involves blocked resources, policy violations, or risks that exceed the project manager’s decision-making scope.

• ✗

  Ignore the conflict and hope it resolves on its own.

  Why it's wrong here

  Ignoring conflict is a passive approach that rarely leads to positive outcomes and often exacerbates the situation, allowing minor disagreements to escalate into significant disruptions. Unresolved conflicts can foster resentment, decrease team morale, reduce productivity, and ultimately jeopardize project objectives by creating a toxic work environment. A project manager's responsibility includes proactive management of team dynamics, and neglecting conflict is a dereliction of this duty.

• ✓

  Facilitate a conflict resolution session with both parties.

  Why this is correct

  After understanding individual perspectives, facilitating a joint session is a direct and collaborative approach, often employing 'Confront/Problem Solve' or 'Collaborate' techniques. The project manager acts as a neutral third party, guiding the discussion to focus on issues rather than personalities, encouraging open communication, and helping the team members identify mutually acceptable solutions. This method aims for a win-win outcome, strengthening team relationships and problem-solving skills for future challenges.

Go deeper

Related to this question