You are managing a multi-year predictive ERP implementation project for a global manufacturing company. The project organizational chart shows a matrixed structure where team members report both to you and their functional managers. Three months into execution, you discover that five critical team members are consistently being pulled back to operations by their functional managers to address production issues, causing them to miss 40% of their planned project hours. This has resulted in two successive missed milestones. You have raised this issue in the last two steering committee meetings, but functional managers argue that production takes priority. The project charter clearly states resource commitment levels, and the sponsor supported the project publicly but has not intervened. What should be your next step?

Question

Accepted Answer

The correct answer is C. Option C is correct because it addresses the root cause through proper escalation channels while providing data-driven justification (ECO People Task 1.1 - Manage conflict and facilitate resolution). In predictive projects, when clearly documented commitments (project charter) are being violated and impacting critical path milestones, the project manager must escalate to the sponsor who has the authority to enforce organizational commitments. Option A, the main distractor, prematurely accepts the constraint without attempting to resolve the underlying charter violation—this approach concedes defeat and may set a precedent that charter commitments are optional. While change requests are eventually needed if the situation cannot be resolved, accepting resource shortfalls without exhausting escalation options fails to exercise appropriate project leadership in a predictive environment where resource planning is foundational.

PMP Practice Question: People — Predictive, Hard

More People Questions