Skip to content
PMPMedium

PMP Practice: Promote the Shared Vision

Question 11 of 20 in Develop a Common Vision

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

Xiu-Ying Huang is managing a digital transformation initiative at Turbulent Otter Games, a biotech research company. The project combines a six-month predictive infrastructure overhaul with agile development of a new laboratory data platform. Three months in, Xiu-Ying notices increasing disconnect between teams: the infrastructure team focuses on technical specifications and compliance deadlines, while the platform developers emphasize user experience and rapid iteration. During a recent retrospective, developers expressed frustration that 'we're building something nobody asked for,' while infrastructure engineers complained about 'constantly changing requirements disrupting our schedule.' Both teams reference the original project vision document, but interpret it differently. Stakeholder satisfaction scores have dropped from 8.2 to 6.1 out of 10. Which approach would be MOST effective for realigning the teams around a common vision?
Show answer & explanation

Correct answer: Facilitate a collaborative visioning workshop with representatives from both teams and key stakeholders to co-create a refreshed vision statement that explicitly addresses both predictive and agile components

Explanation

The scenario reveals teams interpreting the same vision document differently, with declining stakeholder satisfaction and a growing disconnect between predictive and agile components. When teams have divergent interpretations of the vision and are working at cross-purposes, the most effective approach is to bring stakeholders and team members together to collaboratively refresh and align on a shared understanding. A facilitated workshop creates the psychological ownership needed in hybrid environments where different methodologies can create siloed perspectives. The workshop format allows real-time dialogue to surface assumptions, reconcile competing interpretations, and co-create language that resonates with both technical compliance needs and user-centered agile values. The closing facts—both teams reference the same document but interpret it differently, and satisfaction is declining—make collaborative re-visioning clearly more effective than unilateral clarification or process documents.

**Why not A:** Reviewing the original project charter with both teams reinforces approved objectives but does not address the root problem. Both teams already reference the vision document but interpret it differently, so simply re-reading the same document will not create shared understanding or resolve divergent interpretations.

**Why not B:** Creating a detailed integration plan showing how milestones align with sprints addresses the coordination problem but not the vision problem. A schedule alignment document does not resolve the fundamental disconnect between teams about what they are building and why, which is the core issue driving declining satisfaction scores.

**Why not D:** Scheduling separate meetings with each team to clarify their understanding, then consolidating feedback into an updated document, is a top-down approach that misses the essential element of cross-team dialogue. The teams need to hear each other's perspectives directly and co-create a shared understanding, which cannot happen through separate conversations filtered by the PM.

Key Concept

This question covers Promote the Shared Vision 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