You are leading a construction project with a hybrid approach where design work follows agile iterations while procurement and construction follow predictive methods due to regulatory requirements. Your team has just completed an iteration that resulted in significant design changes based on user feedback. However, these changes conflict with materials already procured based on earlier design decisions. The procurement lead insists on using the existing materials to avoid waste and delays, while the design team believes the new approach better serves the end users. How should you proceed?

Question

Accepted Answer

The correct answer is A. In hybrid projects, decisions must be based on value delivery rather than rigid adherence to one methodology over another (ECO Process Task 1.8). A cost-benefit analysis provides objective data to evaluate whether the design improvements justify the procurement changes, enabling an informed decision. Option B incorrectly prioritizes process adherence over value delivery. Option C swings too far toward agile principles without considering the legitimate constraints and costs of the predictive components. Option D assumes a compromise is always best without first understanding if the design improvements are valuable enough to warrant full implementation or if the procurement constraints are truly binding.

PMP Practice Question: Process — Hybrid, Medium

More Process Questions