PMP · Question #648
A company is going through structural changes. A couple of people will leave the company as their positions were made redundant. The team members are unhappy as they do not understand why the…
The correct answer is B. Organize a team meeting to discuss the changes and their importance for the company. The project manager should organize a team meeting to openly discuss the structural changes, explain their rationale, and address team members' concerns to maintain morale and productivity.
Question
A company is going through structural changes. A couple of people will leave the company as their positions were made redundant. The team members are unhappy as they do not understand why the changes are being made when the project is on track. What should the project manager do?
Options
- AAdvise the team to continue their work as planned because the schedule cannot be changed.
- BOrganize a team meeting to discuss the changes and their importance for the company.
- CInform the project sponsor about the team's unhappiness and ask for overtime pay.
- DAdvise the team that the changes were decided by the CEO and must be implemented.
How the community answered
(45 responses)- A4% (2)
- B82% (37)
- C2% (1)
- D11% (5)
Why each option
The project manager should organize a team meeting to openly discuss the structural changes, explain their rationale, and address team members' concerns to maintain morale and productivity.
Advising the team to simply continue work without explanation ignores their concerns and can lead to resentment, decreased morale, and potentially reduced productivity, as well as a loss of trust in leadership.
Transparency and open communication are crucial during organizational changes, especially when team members are unhappy and confused. By organizing a meeting, the project manager can provide context, explain the company's rationale for the changes, and address questions and concerns directly. This helps to alleviate anxiety, foster understanding, maintain trust, and prevent negative impacts on team morale and project performance.
Informing the sponsor about unhappiness is a valid step, but asking for overtime pay doesn't address the root cause of the team's distress (lack of understanding) and may not be an appropriate solution for morale issues stemming from structural changes.
Stating that changes were decided by the CEO and must be implemented is an authoritarian approach that lacks empathy and fails to provide the necessary context or address the team's concerns, likely leading to further disengagement and resentment.
Concept tested: Managing change and team communication during organizational transitions
Source: https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/managing-organizational-change-process-8515
Topics
Community Discussion
5
Samuel O.Jul 5, 2026B is the right call here. I have been through three reorgs in the last decade and in my experience ignoring team morale just tanks productivity, even if the schedule looks fine on paper. PMI is big on proactive communication and stakeholder engagement, so organizing a meeting to explain the business rationale directly addresses the root cause of the unhappiness rather than just treating the symptom. The other options are either dismissive or escalate something the project manager should handle directly.
Olusegun A.Jun 26, 2026I first leaned toward D because it sounded like a quick way to shut down the complaints, but the team is unhappy due to a lack of understanding, not defiance. B is the PMBOK move: you address concerns through communication, explain the business context, and get people aligned with where the company is headed.
Samuel O.Jun 27, 2026Spot on, and in my experience the explanation only sticks if you tie it to something concrete they already care about, otherwise it just sounds like management talking points.
Yusuf A.Jul 5, 2026Going with B. My mentor said transparency is always step one, but would the answer change if the changes were confidential?
Samuel O.Jul 6, 2026B is right and your mentor is correct on principle, but in the field confidential changes still get documented in a restricted access change log, so transparency is scoped to need to know, not broadcast to everyone.