Skip to content
PMPMedium

PMP Practice: Keep the Vision Current

Question 15 of 20 in Develop a Common Vision

Pick an answer below — you'll get the explanation instantly, no signup.

Chidera Nwosu is leading a project at Entropy Spark Corp to redesign their flagship mobile game with both new content releases (developed iteratively) and backend infrastructure upgrades (delivered in phases with strict dependencies). During the kickoff, the marketing director insists the vision should emphasize 'rapid feature launches to capture market share,' while the engineering lead argues for 'architectural stability and technical debt reduction.' The product owner wants to focus on 'player experience and retention metrics.' After the kickoff, Chidera notices that team members are confused about priorities—developers are arguing about whether to refactor legacy code or build new features first, and the marketing team is frustrated that engineering 'doesn't understand urgency.' What should Chidera do to address this misalignment?
Show answer & explanation

Correct answer: Facilitate a collaborative workshop with all three stakeholders to identify shared business outcomes and success metrics that honor both innovation and stability, then co-create a unified vision statement that integrates player value, technical health, and market positioning

Explanation

When stakeholders express competing priorities that create team confusion, the project manager must facilitate collaborative dialogue to uncover the root cause of the misalignment—often differing interpretations of success or unstated concerns. By bringing stakeholders together to identify shared business outcomes (such as sustainable growth, player satisfaction, and competitive positioning), Jade can help them see how their individual priorities actually support common goals. Co-creating a unified vision ensures buy-in, clarity, and integration across both the iterative and predictive elements of the hybrid approach. This collaborative process breaks down the misunderstanding by surfacing assumptions, finding common ground, and producing a vision that teams can rally behind without contradictory guidance.

**Why not B:** While sponsor input is valuable, forcing a binary choice between speed and quality misses the opportunity to find an integrated solution that honors both. This approach also doesn't address the underlying misunderstanding—it imposes a decision rather than building shared understanding. The scenario doesn't indicate the stakeholders' concerns are irreconcilable.

**Why not C:** Creating separate visions for different workstreams fragments the project and perpetuates the misalignment rather than resolving it. A hybrid project still requires a unified vision that guides all work—the approach may vary, but the strategic intent must be coherent. This would worsen team confusion about overall priorities.

**Why not D:** While understanding stakeholder concerns individually is useful, drafting a document alone and seeking approval doesn't facilitate the shared understanding needed for genuine alignment. This approach risks producing a compromised vision that no one fully supports, and doesn't break down the misunderstanding—it papers over it. The scenario's closing fact (team members actively arguing about conflicting priorities) indicates a collaborative resolution is needed, not a unilateral document.

Key Concept

This question covers Keep the Vision Current under Develop a Common Vision (People).

Share:

This is 1 of 100 free PMP questions

Unlock 6,300+ PMP practice questions with detailed explanations, progress tracking, and exam readiness prediction.

Unlock All Questions