The project lead initiates a series of info sessions in some teams as a reaction...

Resistance in SAP cloud projects (e.g., to S/4HANA standardization) often persists if root causes aren’t addressed, and info sessions alone may fail. Option B is correct because without analyzing why users resist—e.g., fear of losing control (cloud hosting), process mismatch (standardization), or skill gaps (new UI)—sessions become generic, missing the mark. For instance, if resistance stems from data security concerns, a session on “project benefits” won’t help without tackling that fear directly; analysis (e.g., via surveys) could reveal this, enabling targeted messaging.

Option A is incorrect—while Q&A options improve engagement, their absence doesn’t inherently sustain resistance; content relevance does. Option C is incorrect; the change manager’s involvement enhances execution, but the project lead can run sessions—lack of analysis, not personnel, is key. Option D is incorrect—top management commitment boosts credibility, but resistance persists if underlying issues remain unaddressed. SAP OCM stresses understanding resistance drivers for effective intervention.

“Resistance persists without analyzing its root causes; info sessions must address specific concerns identified through stakeholder feedback to be effective” (SAP OCM Framework, Resistance Management).