The correct answer is C. Invite team members to observe usability sessions, as keyed in the uploaded study guide.

The problem is not that usability findings are unavailable; the Development team does not sufficiently value or accept them. Allowing developers to observe users directly provides first-hand evidence of where participants struggle, hesitate, misunderstand the interface, or encounter barriers.

Option A adds external best-practice articles to each finding. Those resources may support a recommendation, but they remain indirect evidence. They do not allow developers to witness actual users interacting with the team's product.

Option B focuses on how much effort the research team has invested. Research effort does not establish that a finding is valid or important. Acceptance should be based on user evidence rather than on the amount of work already spent collecting it.

The study guide therefore favors direct exposure to the research process. When team members observe usability sessions themselves, findings become less abstract and are harder to dismiss as merely the UX Designer's interpretation.

This also strengthens multidisciplinary ownership: usability becomes something the whole product team can observe and understand rather than a report delivered by one specialist group.

Study Guide reference/topics: Usability testing, observation, stakeholder buy-in, research acceptance, Testing.

==================================