Skip to content
PMPMedium

PMP Practice: Evaluate/recommend/reconcile the appropriate conflict resolution solution

Question 3 of 4 in Manage Conflict

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

Aroha Tāne-Williams is managing a municipal water infrastructure upgrade project for the city of Riverside. During a design review meeting, the lead civil engineer, Mei-Ling Zhao, and the environmental compliance specialist, Amara Okonkwo-Diallo, engage in a heated disagreement about pump station placement. Dante insists the pumps must be located at the northwest corner for optimal hydraulic efficiency and to minimize long-term operational costs. Lila argues this location would require clearing a wetland buffer zone, violating state environmental regulations and potentially delaying permits by six months. Both are refusing to compromise, and the meeting ends without resolution. The project is currently on schedule, and this decision must be finalized within two weeks to avoid delaying the procurement phase. Aroha has verified that both technical positions are valid within their respective domains. Which conflict resolution approach would be MOST effective?
Show answer & explanation

Correct answer: Meet separately with Dante and Lila to understand their underlying concerns and constraints, then facilitate a joint problem-solving session to explore alternative pump locations that satisfy both hydraulic performance requirements and environmental compliance

Explanation

This scenario requires a collaborative conflict resolution approach because both technical experts have legitimate concerns rooted in their professional domains—hydraulic engineering and environmental compliance. The project manager's role is to facilitate a solution that honors both perspectives rather than forcing a choice between them or splitting the difference arbitrarily. By meeting with each person individually first, Aroha can understand the underlying needs and constraints driving their positions without the defensiveness that occurs in direct confrontation. Then, bringing them together in a structured problem-solving session allows the team to generate creative alternatives—perhaps identifying a third location, modifying the design to reduce environmental impact, or phasing construction differently. This approach treats the conflict as a shared problem to solve rather than a win-lose battle, which preserves working relationships and typically produces superior technical solutions. The scenario specifically states both positions are valid and that schedule allows two weeks for resolution, making collaborative problem-solving both feasible and appropriate.

**Why not A:** Escalating to the public works director for a technical decision that the PM can facilitate is premature. Both experts have valid positions, and the PM should first attempt collaborative resolution that leverages their combined expertise before involving external authority.

**Why not B:** Proposing a geographic midpoint as a compromise is arbitrary and may not satisfy either engineering or environmental requirements. A pump station placement must be based on technical and regulatory criteria, not a split-the-difference approach that could produce a location that fails on both dimensions.

**Why not D:** Reviewing project documents and directing both members to accept the most aligned solution is a top-down directive that removes ownership from the subject matter experts. The PM is not the technical expert here, and imposing a decision may miss creative alternatives that collaborative problem-solving would reveal.

Key Concept

This question covers Evaluate/recommend/reconcile the appropriate conflict resolution solution under Manage Conflict (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