PMP Exam Dumps - Project Management Professional (2025 Version)

The described behavior—agreeing externally while internally opposing—matches the accommodative (also known as smoothing or yielding) conflict resolution style. This approach involves one party giving in to maintain harmony, even at the cost of their own interests.

According to the PMI’s conflict resolution techniques:

Accommodating (or smoothing): One party gives in to maintain harmony.

Avoiding: Withdrawing from conflict and not addressing it.

Collaborating: Working together to find a win-win solution.

Competing (Combative): Pursuing one's own concerns at the other’s expense.

The team members in the scenario were not withdrawing (so not Avoidant), and certainly not arguing (so not Combative). They weren't actively resolving either, which rules out Collaborative. Thus, the correct resolution style is Accommodative.

Conflict management begins with understanding the source and stage of the disagreement. Only then can the appropriate resolution technique (collaborating, compromising, accommodating, etc.) be selected. The PMBOK® Guide – Seventh Edition advocates using emotional intelligence and analysis to manage team dynamics effectively.

Option A escalates before analysis.

Option C assumes a resolution technique without understanding the problem.

Option D bypasses the Agile team’s empowerment and problem-solving structure.

 The project manager should conduct a meeting with the project team to discuss and address the sources of disagreement, as this is a strategy for improving team morale and performance. According to the PMI website, one of the interpersonal and team skills that a project manager should have is conflict management. Conflict management is the process of resolving or reducing disagreements among project stakeholders, such as team members, sponsors, customers, or suppliers. Conflict can arise due to various factors, such as personality differences, communication barriers, resource constraints, or competing interests. If not managed properly, conflict can negatively affect the team morale, productivity, quality, and satisfaction. The project manager should use appropriate conflict resolution techniques, such as problem-solving, compromising, collaborating, smoothing, or forcing, depending on the situation and the desired outcome. The project manager should also facilitate open and constructive communication, encourage feedback and participation, and promote trust and respect among the team members1. By conducting a meeting with the project team, the project manager can identify the root causes and the impact of the disagreement, and work with the team to find a mutually acceptable solution. The project manager can also clarify the project objectives, scope, and requirements, and ensure that the team members understand their roles and responsibilities. By addressing the sources of disagreement, the project manager can improve the team morale and performance, and get the project back on track.

The other options, informing the stakeholders, crashing the project timeline, or issuing a change request, are not the best ways to deal with low team morale and disagreement. Informing the stakeholders may be a necessary communication activity, but it does not solve the problem or improve the situation. Crashing the project timeline may be a schedule compression technique, but it may not be feasible or effective, as it may increase costs, risks, or rework, and may also worsen the team morale and satisfaction. Issuing a change request may be a change management activity, but it may not be necessary or desirable, as it may imply that the project manager is unable to manage the project within the agreed baselines.

 2 Interpersonal and Team Skills - Project Management Institute 1 A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) – Sixth Edition, Chapter 9.5

Stakeholder engagement is the process of identifying, analyzing, planning, and implementing actions to communicate with, influence, and involve stakeholders throughout the project lifecycle. Stakeholder engagement aims to ensure that stakeholders are satisfied with the project outcomes, and that their expectations and needs are met. According to the Professional in Business Analysis Reference Materials1, stakeholder engagement involves the following steps:

Identify stakeholders: Determine who are the individuals or groups that have an interest or influence in the project, and what are their roles, responsibilities, expectations, and power.

Analyze stakeholders: Assess the level of interest and influence of each stakeholder, and their potential impact on the project objectives, scope, schedule, cost, quality, and risks. Use tools such as stakeholder analysis matrix, power/interest grid, or salience model to categorize stakeholders based on their attributes.

Plan stakeholder engagement: Develop strategies and actions to effectively communicate with, involve, and manage stakeholders throughout the project. Use tools such as stakeholder engagement plan, communication plan, or RACI matrix to define the frequency, mode, content, and responsibility of stakeholder interactions.

Implement stakeholder engagement: Execute the planned activities to engage stakeholders, and monitor and measure their feedback, satisfaction, and performance. Use tools such as stakeholder register, issue log, change log, or performance reports to track and document stakeholder engagement.

Evaluate stakeholder engagement: Review and analyze the effectiveness and outcomes of stakeholder engagement, and identify areas for improvement or adjustment. Use tools such as lessons learned, surveys, or interviews to collect and analyze stakeholder feedback and recommendations.

In this scenario, the project manager realizes that a standard stakeholder engagement approach will not suffice, because one of the client representatives, who is not a key decision maker, is extremely opinionated and could become a roadblock to progress due to their perceived level of authority during meetings. This stakeholder could be classified as a high-interest, low-influence stakeholder, who needs to be kept informed and consulted, but not allowed to dominate or derail the project decisions. Therefore, the best option for the project manager is to allocate time to gain buy-in from the stakeholder prior to key decision meetings. This way, the project manager can:

Understand the stakeholder’s perspective, concerns, and expectations, and address them proactively and respectfully.

Build trust and rapport with the stakeholder, and demonstrate the value and benefits of the project for them and their organization.

Involve the stakeholder in the project planning and design process, and solicit their input and feedback on the project scope, objectives, deliverables, and requirements.

Negotiate and compromise with the stakeholder on any conflicting or unrealistic demands, and seek their support and agreement on the project decisions.

Acknowledge and appreciate the stakeholder’s contribution and participation, and recognize their role and authority within their organization.

By allocating time to gain buy-in from the stakeholder prior to key decision meetings, the project manager can enhance the stakeholder engagement, satisfaction, and collaboration, and reduce the risk of resistance, conflict, or delay in the project.

The other options are not the best choices, because:

Asking that only key decision makers attend the project meetings could alienate and offend the stakeholder, and damage the relationship and trust with them and their organization. It could also create a communication gap and a lack of transparency and accountability in the project.

Updating the project schedule to cater to this particular stakeholder could disrupt the project workflow and priorities, and create inefficiencies and delays in the project. It could also cause resentment and frustration among other stakeholders, who may feel that their needs and expectations are not being met or respected.

Updating the risk register to consider the possible project impacts could be a useful step, but it is not sufficient to address the root cause of the problem, which is the stakeholder’s opinionated and authoritative behavior. It could also imply that the project manager is avoiding or ignoring the stakeholder, rather than engaging and influencing them.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:

The first step is to assess the financial impact of adding the 30 team members. Quantifying the cost and checking budget availability ensures data-driven decision-making. Only after this step should the project manager proceed with staffing actions.

* A focuses on SPI forecasting but doesn’t address funding directly.

* C assumes funding is available without analysis.

* D is premature before confirming budget availability.

The project manager should have analyzed the boundaries of the negotiations for agreement to prevent this situation. This involves understanding the company’s policies on core working hours and negotiating a schedule that aligns with the team member’s needs while adhering to organizational norms. By doing so, the project manager could have ensured that the alternative working schedule was acceptable within the company’s framework and avoided scrutiny from other teams. It’s important to balance the flexibility required by the team with the expectations and standards of the broader organization.

While I can’t provide direct links to the specific documents, the principles outlined here are in alignment with the PMI’s standards and guidelines on project management and negotiation within the context of organizational policies and stakeholder management.