PMP · Question #1406
A hybrid project team is working on an upgraded version of software for their product owner. The team is also responsible for supporting the existing product and customers. For the last three…
The correct answer is A. Schedule a session with the team to discuss the issues and work with them to define a plan to. Given the team's struggles with constant interruptions and emotional outbursts, the project manager should first engage the team in a session to collaboratively discuss the issues and develop a plan to better manage competing priorities and stabilize their work.
Question
A hybrid project team is working on an upgraded version of software for their product owner. The team is also responsible for supporting the existing product and customers. For the last three sprints, the team had to stop their project work and focus on major support items for the product owner. The testers are struggling to cope with the constant changes to the plan, which has resulted in a number of emotional outbursts. How should the project manager proceed?
Options
- ASchedule a session with the team to discuss the issues and work with them to define a plan to
- BSchedule a session with the product owner to explain that no support items can be taken into the
- CAsk human resources (HR) to send the team members to a change management workshop
- DRequest a replacement for those team members who are unhappy with this way of working
How the community answered
(24 responses)- A75% (18)
- B13% (3)
- C8% (2)
- D4% (1)
Why each option
Given the team's struggles with constant interruptions and emotional outbursts, the project manager should first engage the team in a session to collaboratively discuss the issues and develop a plan to better manage competing priorities and stabilize their work.
When a team is experiencing stress, emotional outbursts, and disruption due to external factors, a project manager, acting as a servant leader, should first address the situation directly with the team. Collaboratively discussing the issues and defining a plan empowers the team and helps find sustainable solutions.
Concept tested: Team conflict resolution and servant leadership
Source: https://www.pmi.org/pmbok-guide-standards/foundational/pmbok/resource-management
Topics
Community Discussion
11
Imani T.Nov 6, 2025A is the right call here. The team is dealing with both a planning problem and a morale problem, so getting everyone in a room to hash out the issues and collaboratively build a plan is exactly what a servant leader does. B is too rigid for hybrid work, and C and D are cop-outs that just push the problem onto someone else.
Bao N.Nov 7, 2025Agreed on A, but worth noting the question is really testing whether you can distinguish servant leadership from facilitation, so if the stem said the PM should personally resolve the conflict you would be looking at a different answer.
Lena V.Jan 29, 2026A. The PMI way is always to collaborate with the team first to identify root causes and co-create a solution. C and D are premature escalations that ignore the underlying planning issue, and B is too rigid for a hybrid environment where support work is still a reality.
Brenda K.Jan 24, 2026Got this exact scenario on my exam last month and A is a 30 second pick, the team self organizing to address morale and replanning is always the agile answer. B is a trap because you never unilaterally cut off support work without collaborating with the product owner first.
Dervla O.Nov 27, 2025A is the only option that addresses both halves of the problem. The constant reprioritization is a process issue you need to surface with the team and the product owner, and the emotional outbursts signal that the team needs a structured space to vent before you can rebuild a workable plan. B is too absolute for a hybrid environment where support work is legitimately part of the team's charter, and C plus D both treat the symptom instead of the root cause. Has anyone seen a variation where the answer hinges on whether the support work should be tracked as unplanned backlog items versus a separate kan
Wesley A.Feb 2, 2026Got A on my exam last week and it is the only right call here. I almost picked B on my first attempt because telling the product owner no support items sounds like setting boundaries, but the PMs job is to facilitate the conversation with the team first and then work together on a plan, not unilaterally shut things down.
Bao N.Nov 1, 2025Confirmed A on multiple practice tests. The testers having emotional outbursts is a sign the team needs a facilitated discussion to surface concerns and collaboratively define a workable plan, which is exactly what option A delivers.
Ola B.Jan 2, 2026Honestly I almost went with B on this one, because my first instinct was to fix the root cause by cutting off the support work bleeding into the sprint. But then I thought about it more and realized that does not address what is happening with the people right now, and you cannot just go dictate to a product owner what they can and cannot bring in without first getting the team aligned on how to handle it together. The testers are burning out and having emotional outbursts, which tells you the team dynamics are already in a rough spot, so you need to get everyone in a room, surface the real constraints, and co-create a solution, whether that is a dedicated support rotation, a WIP limit on interruptions, or a formal agreement with the product owner about capacity. Option A is the move because a PM who just escalates or sends people to a workshop without sitting with the team first is skipping the most important step, which is actually listening and building a workable plan together.
Wei W.Jan 13, 2026Honestly I leaned toward B, but self-organizing teams solve problems together, not top-down.
Luis F.Nov 19, 2025Going with A, though the answer text getting cut off is super annoying. B is tempting because you want to just tell the product owner to stop, but in a hybrid setup you gotta collaborate with the team first before changing the ground rules.
Bao N.Nov 22, 2025A is right but the real trap is people picking B because they think the PM's job is to shield the team, when in a hybrid setup the ground rules are owned collectively so you bring it to the team rather than unilaterally telling the PO to back off.