I think when a team disagrees with a project manager's decision, the most important thing is communication. The manager should explain the reasoning behind the decision clearly, because sometimes conflict happens just because people don’t fully understand the “why.” At the same time, they should also give space for the team to voice their concerns, showing that their input matters, even if the final call doesn’t change.

One approach I’ve seen work well is to acknowledge everyone’s perspectives, then tie the decision back to the project’s goals, timeline, or constraints. For example, when I was working as a research assistant there was one aspect of a project that I didn’t agree with and after discussing it with my PI they gave the following statement: “I understand your concerns about X, but given our deadline and budget, this option helps us stay aligned with the overall goal.” This made me feel heard but also allowed me to see the bigger picture. 

It also helps if the project manager can compromise on smaller aspects of the decision-making process, letting the team have ownership over how something gets implemented even if the “what” is already decided. That balance can go a long way in keeping motivation and trust strong while still keeping the project moving forward.

This is a great question since this tends to happen a lot in the industry or during any project. This is why during the initiating, planning, and executing phases of the project, it is best and important to hold regular meetings and follow communication plans. I can provide an example. I have had my fair share of these situations during my third and fourth year of undergraduate study with my senior project. I was assigned the “project manager” for this team along with a faculty mentor. Each week, we would meet with our faculty mentor and then afterwards, with the team. I would try to have these meetings at the beginning of the week, so we would have time to complete our tasks of the week in preparation for next week, and also regroup at the end for updates. There were some cases where I made, what I thought, was the best decision to move the project forward towards our goal for the week or next week. One or two members would disagree with that. What I did was be neutral, meaning I did not argue or challenge their comments or opinions. The best way was to listen to each team member on their disagreements on the decision made by the project manager. It would be best and beneficial to take note of these discussions. In this case, everyone’s opinions are considered because they have the chance to voice their opinions to everyone on what they think is best without being criticized. If the project manager does not bother listening to everyone, the connectivity of the team can be broken. It can also cause the team members to be discouraged for even trying to say something. There are some project managers who think they are correct all the way through and do not want to be challenged since they are “in charge” of the project. That should not be the case. That can cause huge issues with the project where team members will do their own thing and nothing will come together since no one is coming to an agreement. 
Back to the previous statement, once everyone had voiced their concerns and provided alternative solutions on their behalf, the project manager would hold a discussion. As I said before, there should be a common goal or an achievable goal at the end of the week. A Gantt chart can be used since it has a timeline, tasks, and subtasks. It shows the tasks and task relations. Some tasks cannot be started until one is finished. To keep things on track, one would look to see what they wanted to accomplish. From there, if what the team member had suggested is slightly better than what the project manager initially stated, then go with that, but they must foster open communication. The project manager should also remember to not stray away from their goal. They may be like this alternative seems a good idea, but wait, it is straying away from what we want to achieve. Everyone must establish clear and concise communication to achieve and meet their end scope. This is why it is quite essential to hold these types of meetings to hear everyone's side and come up with a decision that will not hinder the project objectives and deadlines. This also shows that everyone on the team knows what this project is about and how passionate they are to finish it in the correct manner. Within a team, everyone should be on the same page to provide a smooth sail but also being careful of scope creeps since there is a solidified scope during the planning phase.

Depending on the severity of the disagreement, it can be helpful to the team if you also bring an outside perspective, specifically someone who has faced an issue similar to the one causing the disagreement. This way, it feels less like the manager has the ultimate and final say (even if they still do) and more that each side with have to plead their case so someone else, and the decision will be decided by someone with more practical experience. That way, tension is reduced and still let the team feel heard. 

I agree with what has already been said and discussed here so far, communication and active listening are vital parts of handling disagreements on a project team. Since we learned about the importance of project planning and how beneficial it is to be over prepared and very detailed in planning, I think that can apply for when conflict arises. If there is a structed and planned out way to handle conflicts and disagreements, then everyone can feel like they have opportunity to voice concerns. When a disagreement does come up, the project manager can first opening acknowledge the concern, then, like mentioned explain the "why" behind the decision, then find room for compromise, then document the discussions and move forward. By doing this, everyone on the team can feel like their opinion matters, although at the end of the day, the project manager is in charge and does get to make final decisions. But, with a planned-out method of how to tackle these situations you can balance having respect for the team's prospectives with maintaining the responsibility of keeping the project moving and accomplishing what it is supposed to.

Managing team opinions while sticking to decisions is a crucial skill in medical device development. A project manager must listen carefully to input from engineers, clinicians, and regulatory experts, as their insights often highlight potential risks or improvements. Encouraging open discussions helps create a collaborative environment where team members feel valued. However, not every suggestion can be implemented, as projects must stay aligned with regulatory requirements, timelines, and budgets. The manager should evaluate all opinions objectively and make decisions based on data, safety, and project goals. Once a decision is made, it is important to communicate the reasoning clearly to the team to gain their understanding and support. This balance between respecting team input and maintaining strong leadership ensures steady progress in medical device development.

This post highlights the significance of project roles, especially the project leader or manager role. A project leader may also be a stakeholder, or the stakeholder may be upper management, a vendor, or a customer. A successful project leader and team is capable of identifying and relaying the major concerns especially during the initiating phase that may impact the project. This phase provides time to build their scope awareness and cover the effects that the device will cause before major steps are taken. 

Many leaders emphasize on the initiating and planning phases due to the savings whether that be using their resources, budget, or time more effectively. However, disagreements or unexpected challenges may still arise and that is why the planning phase may continue to the execution phase. The monitoring & controlling phase also exists throughout the entirety of the project and acts as security. Ultimately, the project leader needs to make sure that the day-to-day decisions are in line with the scope and the stakeholder has final approval.

Nonetheless, the skill level and the size of the team has a great impact on project development. Incorporating members in QA, engineering, marketing, sales, and accounting are highly encouraged. If a team member disagrees with the project manager, then it is extremely important to have data that supports a change must occur. This change is part of the monitoring & controlling phase because a change control procedure must be followed. The process requires a change or project manager as well as upper management for evaluation and approval.

The emotional intelligence aspect of leadership in these circumstances is, in my opinion, something that is important. If team members feel underappreciated, conflicts may worsen even after a project manager provides a detailed explanation of the cause. Long-term disputes can be avoided by doing small things like quietly checking in with a frustrated teammate, being open and honest about trade-offs, and acknowledging contributions.

Using an impartial third party to reframe the conversation, such as a mentor or facilitator, is another useful tactic. This relieves the management of some of the strain and enables the team to assess ideas on the basis of merit rather than authority.

Should project managers be formally trained in negotiation and conflict resolution, as they are in risk management and scheduling? Or would it be better to learn that on the job?

I believe having a manager or lead that actively listens to the members of the group promotes a healthy discussion towards the betterment of the project at hand. Ultimately, it does fall onto the lead to make the decision, especially given (as noted in the presentation) that they could potentially take the blame for missed deadlines or worse. With that said, listening to the team's concerns and ideas would most likely help them in avoiding such an incident.

Some potential strategies to avoid running into incidents before a project starts could be: having an appointee to collect all concerns or ideas to send to the project manager to look through, having a designated day to discuss troubleshooting/ideas/concerns, or having a small unit leadership where the groups handling the projects talk to a group lead about concerns to see if it could be solved before routing it up.

I think in some ways, in an ideal situation and with time, all of these options could be implemented. If analyzing one by one, I believe the first and third option could have a risk of creating an "us vs them" situation where there is a disconnect between the manager and members of the group. I believe designated meetings or times to discuss concerns might be beneficial and helps create open dialogue where everyone is in understanding and can pitch in with their own ideas.

I can agree with a lot of the points that have been made before my post, specifically on the communication aspect and the openness with the team. In my opinion, it is important that if an individual or multiple individuals disagrees with the project manager's decision, they should speak up. Especially if the project manager is directing the team towards making a mistake or hitting a roadblock that is not seen by everyone else, it is crucial that there is not too much progress made with the knowledge of a possible bad outcome. It is better to speak up earlier than late. In the case that the project manager disagrees with a suggestion or advice on the how to approach the project, the individual or group should discuss their ideas completely and thoroughly with not only the project manager but also the rest of the team. If the rest of the team believe it is a better idea than the current project manager's proposition (and let us say it is), in my opinion this can help to persuade the project manager in taking the more efficient route and also help to increase the chemistry among the project team (since they will be more open to taking in each other's ideas). It is important that these types of discussions occur in the planning phase earlier on rather than later since you do not want to initiate and work on a plan and then have to go back and change things in the future.

From the point of view of the project manager, hearing out opinions is crucial because different members of the project team approach the project from different viewpoints. You may see something that others do not and vice versa. From working on projects previously in the professional world in my internships, even when I first started with 0 experience sometimes, I was able to point out things to my manager who has 15 years of experience. Everyone can learn from each other so being open to discussion is very important. To make sure the project is staying on track, especially in busy times, the project manager can just request the individual or groups who disagree with the project approach to write up some type of shortened summary of what they disagree with and how their changes could help the project. The project manager should be open with this because the success of the team and the morale of the team rely on allowing ideas to flow amongst the project group. Compromising during the decision-making process can ultimately allow for the project to be successful within the guidelines that are given to the project manager.

The best course of action when a team disagrees with a project manager's choice is to foster open communication while maintaining the project's objectives as the primary focus. A competent manager should first pay close attention to the team's worries and encourage members to explain their positions. This will not only help the manager identify possible problems the team may not have thought of, but it will also make the team feel appreciated and valued. After hearing everyone's viewpoints, the management should justify their choice or list the trade-offs and relate it to the goals, schedule, and limitations of the project. Building consensus and confidence can be achieved by integrating some of the team's suggestions into the solution, if at all possible. The management must, however, also exercise decisiveness when required; if the input conflicts with the project's priorities, they must explain why proceeding according to plan is the best course of action. The manager may make sure that perspectives are taken into account without losing focus on producing outcomes by upholding transparency, demonstrating respect for the team's contribution, and connecting decisions to the project's overarching vision.