PMP · Question #969
There is an upcoming merger between a functional organization and an agile organization. The merger has necessitated that team members from both organizations brainstorm the effect this merger will…
The correct answer is A. Hold a joint meeting with both organizations, determine an engagement method, and then. To brainstorm the impact of a merger on compliance standards between functional and agile organizations, the project manager should hold a joint meeting, establish a collaborative engagement method, and then facilitate the discussion.
Question
There is an upcoming merger between a functional organization and an agile organization. The merger has necessitated that team members from both organizations brainstorm the effect this merger will have on critical compliance standards and the previous regulations for a project. What should the project manager do in order to achieve this objective?
Options
- AHold a joint meeting with both organizations, determine an engagement method, and then
- BSchedule separate breakaway sessions for each organization to brainstorm and share ideas.
- CHold separate meetings for each organization, determine an engagement method, and then
- DBring a team of experts to brainstorm and agree on the next course of action for the
How the community answered
(29 responses)- A83% (24)
- B10% (3)
- C3% (1)
- D3% (1)
Why each option
To brainstorm the impact of a merger on compliance standards between functional and agile organizations, the project manager should hold a joint meeting, establish a collaborative engagement method, and then facilitate the discussion.
A joint meeting with representatives from both organizations is crucial for cross-functional brainstorming, ensuring all perspectives on compliance and regulations are considered together to find common ground and shared understanding from the outset.
Scheduling separate breakaway sessions initially might reinforce existing organizational silos and make it harder to achieve a unified understanding and agreement on shared compliance standards and regulations.
Holding separate meetings initially before a joint discussion delays the necessary direct interaction and collaboration required to bridge the gap between different organizational cultures and compliance approaches.
While experts can contribute, the question emphasizes brainstorming the effect on *team members* from both organizations, making it critical for those directly involved to collaborate rather than solely relying on external experts.
Concept tested: Cross-organizational collaboration and change management
Topics
Community Discussion
7
Wei W.Feb 6, 2026A is correct here. You want both organizations in the room together so the engagement method is co-created and the conversation around compliance and regulations happens with full transparency rather than in silos, which is what empiricism and real collaboration are all about.
Yusuf A.Feb 13, 2026Going with A here. My mentor always says when you have two different organizational cultures merging, you get them in the same room first so the engagement approach is built together rather than forced on one side by the other.
Yuki V.Mar 6, 2026A is correct because when you have two different organizational cultures coming together, you want them in the same room collaborating from the start rather than siloed. The key phrase in the stem is brainstorming the effect of the merger, which means both groups need that shared context to properly evaluate compliance standards together. Holding separate sessions first, like in B and C, just builds walls between the teams before they even begin. I had almost this exact scenario on my exam last month and the joint meeting jumped out at me right away because my brain was trained to look for the answer that gets people talking together.
Mei-Ling H.Mar 15, 2026I first leaned toward B because separate sessions seem safer when two very different cultures merge, but the word "then" in A and C is the key sequence the stem is testing. Since the question asks what the PM should do to achieve the shared objective, you need a joint meeting first to establish a single engagement method before brainstorming together. C traps people who think separate meetings reduce conflict, but that delays alignment on compliance standards. Confirmed A on my attempt last month.
Yusuf A.Mar 16, 2026That "then" in the stem is exactly what my senior pointed out when we reviewed this one, since the sequence implies you need alignment before brainstorming, which lines up with how PMI frames stakeholder engagement planning.
Lena V.Feb 22, 2026Confirmed A on exam last week. D is tempting because experts sound efficient but the question wants cross-organizational collaboration on compliance impact, not a handoff to a small group. Heads up though, the option text cuts off mid-sentence which is annoying, but A is the only one that gets both sides in a room together first.
Wei W.Feb 23, 2026Yeah A is right but the real reason is that compliance impact has to be surfaced through conversation and working examples, not handed off to experts who estimate risk in isolation - that just moves the uncertainty downstream where it costs more to fix.