PMP · Question #277
A government agency is developing a new connectivity policy. The assigned project manager is a famous economist with international recognition. The team is eager to work with the project manager, but
The correct answer is A. Consider organizing paired work sessions for the junior and senior economists.. To address a junior team member's intimidation and falling behind schedule due to a highly esteemed project manager, the project manager should first facilitate collaborative learning through paired work.
Question
A government agency is developing a new connectivity policy. The assigned project manager is a famous economist with international recognition. The team is eager to work with the project manager, but feels intimidated. The project manager realizes that a junior economist, whose tasks are behind schedule, is especially intimidated by the situation. What should the project manager do first?
Options
- AConsider organizing paired work sessions for the junior and senior economists.
- BReassign some of the junior economist's tasks to other economists.
- CEvaluate the performance of the junior economist in the upcoming months.
- DRequest to replace the junior economist with a more experienced economist.
How the community answered
(52 responses)- A71% (37)
- B4% (2)
- C17% (9)
- D8% (4)
Why each option
To address a junior team member's intimidation and falling behind schedule due to a highly esteemed project manager, the project manager should first facilitate collaborative learning through paired work.
Organizing paired work sessions between the junior and senior economists can directly address both the intimidation and the lagging schedule by fostering a supportive learning environment. This approach allows the junior economist to gain confidence and skills through direct mentorship, improving task completion while breaking down perceived barriers with the project manager.
Reassigning tasks without addressing the underlying intimidation or skill gap does not resolve the junior economist's development needs and may further demotivate them.
Waiting to evaluate performance in upcoming months is a reactive approach that allows the current problems (intimidation, delayed tasks) to persist and potentially worsen, delaying effective intervention.
Requesting to replace a team member is a drastic measure and should be a last resort, especially when the issue is related to intimidation and potential skill development rather than outright incompetence or unwillingness.
Concept tested: Team development, mentorship, managing intimidation, performance support
Topics
Community Discussion
4
Imani T.Feb 21, 2026A. The PMP exam always wants you to develop team members rather than replace or sideline them, and paired work sessions directly address both the intimidation factor and the schedule slippage. B, C, and D are all avoidance moves that the exam treats as wrong because a good PM coaches people up instead of pushing them aside.
Yusuf A.Feb 23, 2026Going with A. A senior dev at my company does something similar when onboarding new hires, he calls it pair problem-solving, and it really takes the pressure off. D is tempting because the tasks are already behind schedule, but replacing someone because they are intimidated by you is a harsh first move.
Toby R.Mar 3, 2026Confirmed A on exam last week. B is the trap because reassigning tasks feels like a quick fix for the schedule slip, but the question is really about the intimidation factor and team dynamics, not bandwidth.
Wei W.Mar 10, 2026A is the right call here. Pairing lowers the intimidation barrier and gets the junior economist unblocked through direct collaboration, which is always a better first move than reassigning or replacing.