mediumMultiple Choice
PK0-005 Practice Question: A project manager is leading a software…
A project manager is leading a software development project. The team is consistently delivering work late, causing schedule delays. The project manager suspects the initial duration estimates were too optimistic. What is the best action to improve future estimation accuracy?
⚠ Common exam trap
CompTIA often tests the misconception that schedule extensions or resource additions are the primary corrective actions for delays, when the correct approach is to improve the estimation process itself through data-driven methods like historical analysis.
Answer choices
Why each option matters
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
Review historical data and lessons learned from similar projects.
Reviewing historical data and lessons learned from similar projects (Option A) directly addresses the root cause of inaccurate estimates by leveraging empirical evidence from past work. This aligns with the PMI's iterative estimation approach, where actual performance data (e.g., velocity from previous sprints) is used to calibrate future estimates, improving accuracy over time. In software development, this is analogous to using historical cycle times or story point completion rates to refine planning poker sessions.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✓
Review historical data and lessons learned from similar projects.
Why this is correct
Historical data and lessons learned supply actual durations from comparable past projects, replacing optimistic assumptions with evidence-based estimates. This directly addresses the root cause identified in the stem — initial estimates being too optimistic — by grounding future estimates in demonstrated team performance.
- ✗
Extend the project schedule to accommodate delays.
Why it's wrong here
Extending the schedule merely absorbs the overrun; it neither records actual durations nor feeds historical data back into future estimates, so the optimism bias persists. It is tempting because schedule compression or extension is a legitimate response to an active delay, but that addresses delivery, not estimation accuracy.
- ✗
Assign additional team members to complete tasks faster.
Why it's wrong here
Adding team members addresses delivery speed, not estimate accuracy, and Brooks's law means onboarding overhead can slow the team further. It suits a genuinely under-resourced schedule, but improving estimates requires reviewing historical actuals and applying analogous or parametric estimating techniques.
- ✗
Increase all future estimates by 20% to account for unknowns.
Why it's wrong here
Blanket padding ignores the actual estimation error, so optimistic bias persists and compounds. It is tempting because contingency reserves address genuine unknowns, but those are calculated from documented risk exposure, not a fixed uplift applied across every task regardless of its uncertainty.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
This PK0-005 question is part of Courseiva's 954-question bank — original exam-style content with full explanations and wrong-answer analysis, never real exam questions or exam dumps. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
This PK0-005 practice question is part of Courseiva's free CompTIA certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the PK0-005 exam.