Project Management Professional Practice Test

The 'Plan Risk Management' process is essential for detailing how risk management will be structured and performed within the project. It sets out the methodology to be used, assigns roles and responsibilities, establishes budgeting for risk management activities, timing when such activities will be performed, determines risk categories for more efficient risk analysis, and takes into account the stakeholders' risk appetite and thresholds. This ensures a systemic approach for managing both individual and overall project risks.

The project manager is using a transfer strategy. Transfer shifts the impact of a threat-as well as responsibility for managing the response-to a third party, typically through insurance, warranties, performance bonds, or contractual terms. It does not eliminate the risk but reallocates its consequences. The other options describe different strategies: Avoid eliminates the threat entirely, Mitigate reduces its probability or impact, and Accept acknowledges the threat without proactive action unless it occurs.

The primary purpose of a risk workshop is to collectively review and evaluate the identified project risks, determine their impact and probability, categorize them, and establish their prioritization for further action or analysis. It is an interactive session that enables the risk owner to understand the risk deeply, explore response strategies, and aim to reach shared understanding and agreement on how to tackle the risks identified for the project .

The correct answer is the project with an NPV of $310,000 and a 4-year payback period. When making financial decisions for project selection, Net Present Value (NPV) is considered a superior metric to Payback Period. NPV accounts for the time value of money and a project's total profitability over its entire lifecycle, providing a more complete picture of business value.

• The project with a negative NPV of -$20,000 should be rejected immediately, as it is projected to result in a financial loss.
• While other projects offer a shorter payback period, the Payback Period metric is less comprehensive. It only indicates the time required to recover the initial investment and ignores all cash flows and profitability after that point.
• Since the primary criterion is maximizing value via NPV, the project with the highest positive NPV ($310,000) is the best choice, even though it has a longer payback period.

When strategic alignment, risk, and resource usage are the same, PMI recommends selecting the option that yields the greatest economic value. Net Present Value (NPV) expresses the absolute dollar benefit after accounting for the time value of money; a higher NPV therefore increases organizational wealth more than a lower one. Internal Rate of Return (IRR) shows the percentage return, but it can be misleading when comparing projects of different sizes. Because Project A's NPV (US$250 000) exceeds Project B's (US$200 000), Project A contributes the larger dollar benefit and is the more financially attractive choice. Choosing both is not possible with limited funding, and delaying a decision adds no additional insight when the discount rate is already accepted.

Re-examining the RACI chart with the team clarifies who is accountable and responsible for each upcoming test case, eliminating ambiguity and reinforcing ownership. Simply adding schedule float (choice B) treats the symptom rather than the cause. Asking the sponsor to monitor tasks (choice C) undermines team self-management and may create unnecessary escalation. Replacing the lagging contributors (choice D) is premature and fails to address the underlying clarity issue.

Conducting a retrospective meeting to document lessons learned is essential in order to capture what went well, what did not go well, and what could be done differently in future phases or projects. This creates a valuable knowledge base that can help improve future project performance and prevent the repetition of past mistakes. Updating procurement financials is important for closing the current phase accounts. Meanwhile, releasing resources ensures that they are available for other projects. However, they are not as crucial for adding value to future projects as documenting lessons learned for future reference. Discussing project responsibilities within the team may be part of the transition or handover but does not inherently contribute to the capture of knowledge that will add value to future projects.

Discretionary dependencies (often referred to as preferred, preferential or soft dependencies) are established based on knowledge of best practices within a particular application area or on some aspect of the project where a specific sequence is desired, although there may be other acceptable sequences. They are differentiated from mandatory dependencies (also known as hard logic) which are inherent in the nature of the work being done.

The correct answer is 'The conflict is task-related and at the disagreement stage.' This is because Sarah and John are not in personal conflict but disagree on project parameters like direction and timelines. Recognizing this allows a project manager to address these issues specifically, rather than mistaking this for a potential interpersonal clash or a deeper stage of conflict, which might require a different approach.

Resource smoothing is the correct technique for this scenario. It adjusts the timing of activities within their available float to create a more consistent resource usage pattern without affecting the project's critical path or end date. This technique addresses the uneven distribution of work for skilled laborers (peaks and valleys in the resource histogram) while maintaining the project's completion date.

Other options are incorrect because:

• Fast tracking overlaps sequential activities, which doesn't address resource distribution.
• Resource leveling might extend the project timeline.
• Crashing the schedule adds resources or authorizes overtime, which isn't necessary and doesn't solve the uneven distribution.

The lessons learned register is a dynamic project document created early and updated throughout the project. It captures both positive outcomes and problems-including realized risks, good practices, and areas for improvement-so the current team and future projects can benefit from that knowledge. Other documents (risk register, stakeholder engagement plan, quality management plan) serve different purposes and do not comprehensively store successes and failures.

The correct answer is that the project's critical path and end date will not be affected. The difference between the Late Start (LS) and Early Start (ES) of an activity determines its total float. Total float is the amount of time an activity can be delayed without delaying the project's end date. In this scenario, the calculation is: Float = LS - ES = 8 days - 5 days = 3 days. Since the potential delay is only two days, which is less than the available float of three days, the activity can be delayed without affecting the project's critical path or its final completion date.

The correct answer is that the project is over budget. The metric described in the question is the Cost Performance Index (CPI), which is calculated as CPI = EV / AC (Earned Value divided by Actual Cost). The CPI is a measure of cost efficiency in a project. A CPI value less than 1.0 indicates that the project is spending more money than planned for the work completed. Specifically:

• CPI > 1: Project is under budget
• CPI = 1: Project is on budget
• CPI < 1: Project is over budget

In this case, with a value of 0.85, the project is spending more than planned for the work accomplished. For every dollar spent, the project is only earning $0.85 in value. This suggests that cost-saving measures or budget adjustments may be necessary to improve the project's financial performance.

Self-organizing teams are empowered to decide how work is performed and to redistribute tasks among themselves as conditions change. Because team members collectively manage workload and process decisions, they can re-plan and execute new priorities immediately instead of escalating for permission. Leadership-driven reprioritization, detailed predictive plans, or rotating the Scrum Master are external or ancillary factors and do not provide the same built-in adaptability.

The correct answer is to analyze measurable data related to the initial problem. Verifying performance improvements requires objective evidence. By comparing Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) like team velocity and defect rates from before and after the interventions, the project manager can provide concrete, quantifiable proof of the impact. While team surveys, product owner feedback, and individual self-assessments are valuable for gathering qualitative insights and gauging morale, they are subjective and do not serve as the most effective method for formally verifying performance improvements for a management report.

Specific, Constructive, Timely, and Actionable feedback (SCTA feedback) is most effective as it addresses specific actions, provides constructive suggestions, and offers feedback at a relevant time with clear steps for improvement. This technique helps in precise communication and actionable improvements, thereby enhancing team dynamics. Conversely, while other methods like detailed yet delayed feedback might provide in-depth information, the lack of timeliness can reduce the impact. Similarly, positive but vague feedback might not offer clear directions for improvement.

Ensuring that the agreement is documented and shared with all relevant parties is essential. This fosters transparency, confirms mutual understanding, and serves as a reference point throughout the project. While effective communication and monitoring progress are important subsequent steps, they should follow the formal documentation of the agreement to provide clarity and a solid foundation for future actions.

A Risk Response Plan translates the analysis documented in the risk register into concrete, approved actions. It specifies the strategies, owners, resources, and timing needed to exploit or enhance opportunities and to avoid, transfer, mitigate, or accept threats. By defining these responses up front, the team ensures that risk exposure is kept within agreed tolerance levels and that contingency and fallback actions are ready for rapid execution. Historical records, progressive budgeting, or post-project logs may be useful, but they are not the primary purpose of the plan.

The most effective way to resolve a team-wide misunderstanding and build shared understanding is through rich, interactive communication. A dedicated meeting allows for real-time dialogue, immediate feedback, and collaborative problem-solving to ensure all team members are aligned. While updating documentation, meeting individually, or gathering written feedback are all plausible actions, they are less immediate and effective for resolving a group discrepancy than a facilitated, live meeting. Direct conversation is crucial for uncovering the root cause of the misunderstanding and achieving a unified consensus.

The Stakeholder Register is created during the Identify Stakeholders process in Project Stakeholder Management. It records detailed information such as names, roles, contact details, interests, power, and influence for every identified stakeholder.

• The Project Charter only lists key stakeholders at a high level and does not include full analyses or complete contact information.
• The Stakeholder Engagement Plan outlines strategies for engaging stakeholders, not the raw analysis data itself.
• The Communications Management Plan focuses on how project information will be distributed and does not catalog every stakeholder's detailed attributes.