PMP · Question #1252
The operations director complains to the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) about the outcome of a project's first sprint. The operations department will not be able to support a new product due to poor pe
The correct answer is C. Invite a member of the operations team to be part of the validation and sprint meetings.. To address the operations director's complaint, the project manager should integrate a member of the operations team into the validation and sprint meetings. This fosters direct communication and ensures their requirements and acceptance criteria are understood and met from the o
Question
The operations director complains to the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) about the outcome of a project's first sprint. The operations department will not be able to support a new product due to poor performance indicators. The project team facilitator asks for feedback from the project team and is informed that performance information is available in the application server log. How should this complaint be addressed?
Options
- ARequest that the issue be included in the next board of directors meeting to explain all of the
- BAdd the complaint to the product backlog to be addressed in the next sprint.
- CInvite a member of the operations team to be part of the validation and sprint meetings.
- DAsk the operations director to define the acceptance criteria to make clear the delivery is correct.
How the community answered
(40 responses)- A28% (11)
- B13% (5)
- C53% (21)
- D8% (3)
Why each option
To address the operations director's complaint, the project manager should integrate a member of the operations team into the validation and sprint meetings. This fosters direct communication and ensures their requirements and acceptance criteria are understood and met from the outset.
Escalating to the board of directors is an overreaction and does not address the root cause of the operational misalignment or communication breakdown directly with the relevant stakeholders.
Simply adding the complaint to the product backlog is reactive and doesn't guarantee that the underlying communication and validation issues with the operations team will be resolved or that their input will be sufficiently incorporated.
The operations department's complaint indicates a gap in understanding or alignment regarding performance indicators and product usability from an operational perspective. Including an operations team member in validation and sprint meetings ensures their concerns are heard early, their needs are incorporated into acceptance criteria, and they have visibility into the evolving product. This proactive involvement helps bridge the communication gap and ensures the delivered product meets operational requirements and is supportable.
Asking the operations director to define acceptance criteria is a good step, but inviting them to be part of the meetings (Option C) is more collaborative and ensures that the criteria are understood, tested, and continuously refined throughout the sprint, rather than just being a one-time definition.
Concept tested: Stakeholder collaboration and agile feedback loops
Source: https://www.pmi.org/pmbok-guide-standards/foundational/agile-practice-guide/stakeholder-engagement
Topics
Community Discussion
7
Grace U.Jan 13, 2026C is correct here. In agile, the fix for a stakeholder complaint about a product not meeting expectations is to bring that stakeholder closer to the team, not to escalate or simply log the issue for later. Inviting operations to validation and sprint meetings ensures their concerns about supportability are heard in real time and folded into the ongoing development process. The other options either delay the conversation or shift responsibility in a way that breaks the collaborative spirit of agile.
Mateus R.Jan 15, 2026Right call, and the analogy I always use is a kitchen tasting the dish throughout cooking instead of waiting for the customer to send it back, but I would add that inviting ops to every sprint meeting can burn them out fast, so target the reviews and validations where their supportability concerns actually apply.
Mateus R.Jan 22, 2026I first leaned toward B since adding it to the product backlog sounds like the agile way to handle complaints, but then I realized the real issue is that operations got surprised because they were never in the loop. Think of it like a restaurant where the kitchen never talked to the waitstaff before rolling out a new dish, so you fix it by getting ops a seat at the table for validation and sprint meetings, which is what C does.
Yuki V.Jan 5, 2026Just passed my CAPM last month and C is the right call here - agile is all about getting stakeholders involved early rather than letting complaints fester after the fact. The logic is that if operations needs to support this product, they should have a seat at the table during sprint reviews so issues surface before they escalate to the CEO. Quick question for anyone who has taken the PMP - do you find these stakeholder engagement questions always lean toward inclusion, or are there scenarios where adding someone to the team mid-sprint is actually the wrong move?
Ingrid P.Feb 5, 2026Going with A. An escalation from the operations director to the CEO is a stakeholder issue that demands visibility at the governance level, and the board meeting is the right forum to walk through the server log data and address the performance concerns head-on.
Imani T.Feb 6, 2026C is correct here, Ingrid. An ops director escalating to the CEO is a management communication issue, not a governance board item, and walking through server logs at a board meeting is a level-of-detail mismatch that would waste everyone's time.
Imani T.Feb 16, 2026Leaned B first but ops needs visibility now, not next sprint. C gets them in the room.