You are managing a complex aerospace engineering project with a 36-month timeline using earned value management (EVM) for performance tracking. Your project has a CPI of 0.89 and SPI of 0.92 at the 12-month mark. The executive steering committee is considering canceling the project due to poor performance. Your analysis reveals that performance issues are concentrated in one engineering team led by a manager who has been with the company for 18 years and has strong relationships with senior executives. This manager is resistant to your process improvement suggestions and has stated that 'engineering excellence cannot be rushed.' Other team leads have privately expressed frustration with this manager's team missing dependencies. The manager's functional director is defensive of their employee and suggests the schedule was unrealistic from the start. What should be your PRIMARY focus to address this situation?

Question

Accepted Answer

The correct answer is A. This scenario tests sophisticated understanding of stakeholder management, performance management, and organizational dynamics in a predictive environment. Option A is correct because it addresses the situation through data-driven, collaborative problem-solving while maintaining respect for the individual and organizational relationships. By gathering objective data, the project manager moves from perception to facts, which is essential when dealing with a long-tenured employee with executive relationships. Facilitating lessons-learned and developing a corrective action plan together creates ownership and addresses the issue constructively. This approach aligns with PMI's emphasis on servant leadership and collaborative problem-solving (ECO People Task 1.2). Option B, the primary distractor, might seem appropriate given the project's poor performance metrics, but immediately escalating to senior leadership without attempting direct resolution can damage trust, create defensiveness, and may backfire given the manager's relationships. The question states the functional director is already defensive, so escalation without attempting collaborative resolution first would likely worsen the situation. Option C deflects from the identified root cause (one team's performance) and risks re-baselining unnecessarily, which could mask real performance issues. Option D takes a political approach that avoids the real problem, may not be feasible given existing dependencies, and fails to develop the team or resolve the underlying issue. The scenario tests whether candidates understand that effective project managers address difficult interpersonal situations directly but diplomatically, using data and collaboration rather than politics or avoidance.

More People Questions