Scenario practice questions

During project execution, the project team is experiencing conflicts and questioning the project manager's authority. According to Tuckman's model, which stage is the team in?

Trap 1: Norming

Norming follows storming, when conflicts are resolved and cohesion and agreed working norms emerge; active conflict and questioning of authority precede it. Norming would be correct once the team has reconciled differences and accepts the project manager's role.

Trap 2: Performing

Performing is the mature stage with shared goals, autonomy and constructive disagreement; overt conflict and challenges to the project manager's authority indicate storming. Performing would be correct once the team works productively with settled norms and minimal supervision.

Trap 3: Forming

Forming is orientation, where members depend on the leader and avoid conflict; open questioning of authority and interpersonal clashes belong to storming. Forming would fit a newly assembled team still learning roles and objectives, before disagreements surface.

A
Norming
Why it fails: Norming follows storming, when conflicts are resolved and cohesion and agreed working norms emerge; active conflict and questioning of authority precede it. Norming would be correct once the team has reconciled differences and accepts the project manager's role.
B
Performing
Why it fails: Performing is the mature stage with shared goals, autonomy and constructive disagreement; overt conflict and challenges to the project manager's authority indicate storming. Performing would be correct once the team works productively with settled norms and minimal supervision.
C
Forming
Why it fails: Forming is orientation, where members depend on the leader and avoid conflict; open questioning of authority and interpersonal clashes belong to storming. Forming would fit a newly assembled team still learning roles and objectives, before disagreements surface.
D
Storming
Storming is the stage where team members challenge the project manager's authority and conflict emerges over roles and direction. This directly matches the stem's reported conflicts and authority questioning, distinguishing it from forming (polite orientation), norming (cohesion established) and performing (focus on delivery).

Question 2hardmultiple choice

A project manager notices that a key team member is frequently pulled away to work on another priority project, causing delays. This situation is an example of which type of constraint?

Trap 1: Mandatory dependency

Mandatory dependencies are contractually or legally required activity sequences, such as needing a foundation before framing. The delay stems from shared personnel availability, which is a resource constraint. Mandatory dependency would fit if the stem described a hard technical or contractual ordering.

Trap 2: Technical constraint

A technical constraint concerns limitations of technology, tools or design standards, not staffing. The team member's competing allocation is a resource constraint. Technical constraints would be correct if, for example, a platform's capability restricted how work could proceed.

Trap 3: Discretionary dependency

A discretionary dependency is a choice-based scheduling relationship between activities, not a resourcing conflict. Resource contention across projects is a resource constraint. Discretionary dependencies would be correct when sequencing is optional, such as preferred ordering based on best practise rather than logic.

A
Mandatory dependency
Why it fails: Mandatory dependencies are contractually or legally required activity sequences, such as needing a foundation before framing. The delay stems from shared personnel availability, which is a resource constraint. Mandatory dependency would fit if the stem described a hard technical or contractual ordering.
B
Resource constraint
The team member's availability is limited by competing demands from another project, which is a resource constraint: a restriction on people, equipment, or materials. Scope, time, and cost constraints concern deliverables, schedule, and budget rather than shared staffing.
C
Technical constraint
Why it fails: A technical constraint concerns limitations of technology, tools or design standards, not staffing. The team member's competing allocation is a resource constraint. Technical constraints would be correct if, for example, a platform's capability restricted how work could proceed.
D
Discretionary dependency
Why it fails: A discretionary dependency is a choice-based scheduling relationship between activities, not a resourcing conflict. Resource contention across projects is a resource constraint. Discretionary dependencies would be correct when sequencing is optional, such as preferred ordering based on best practise rather than logic.

Question 3mediummulti select

A project manager is selecting a project from several proposals. The project with the highest Net Present Value (NPV) also has the longest payback period. Which TWO factors should the project manager consider when recommending this project? (Select TWO).

Trap 1: The project has the shortest payback period

The stem already states this project has the longest payback period, so claiming the shortest contradicts the given data and cannot be a factor. Payback period measures how quickly cumulative cash inflows recover the initial outlay, making it relevant when comparing proposals with similar NPVs or when liquidity constraints dominate.

Trap 2: The project has the lowest initial cost

Initial cost is not the deciding factor here; NPV already discounts all future cash flows against that outlay, so a low initial cost can still yield poor value. Initial cost matters when capital budgets are tightly capped and proposals must fit within a fixed funding envelope.

Trap 3: The project requires minimal resources

Minimal resource requirements address execution capacity, not the financial trade-off between NPV and payback period that the stem asks the manager to weigh. Resource minimisation is the right consideration when skilled staff or infrastructure are the binding constraint on which projects can proceed.

A
The project has the shortest payback period
Why it fails: The stem already states this project has the longest payback period, so claiming the shortest contradicts the given data and cannot be a factor. Payback period measures how quickly cumulative cash inflows recover the initial outlay, making it relevant when comparing proposals with similar NPVs or when liquidity constraints dominate.
B
The high NPV indicates strong long-term profitability
NPV discounts all future cash flows to present value, so the highest NPV signals the greatest absolute value creation over the project's full life. This justifies accepting the long payback period, since the stem's constraint is long-term profitability rather than speed of recovery.
C
The project aligns with organizational strategy
Strategic alignment determines whether a financially attractive project actually advances organisational objectives, which NPV alone cannot capture. When payback is longest, this qualitative fit justifies tolerating delayed returns, satisfying the stem's need to weigh non-financial factors alongside the highest NPV.
D
The project has the lowest initial cost
Why it fails: Initial cost is not the deciding factor here; NPV already discounts all future cash flows against that outlay, so a low initial cost can still yield poor value. Initial cost matters when capital budgets are tightly capped and proposals must fit within a fixed funding envelope.
E
The project requires minimal resources
Why it fails: Minimal resource requirements address execution capacity, not the financial trade-off between NPV and payback period that the stem asks the manager to weigh. Resource minimisation is the right consideration when skilled staff or infrastructure are the binding constraint on which projects can proceed.

Question 4hardmulti select

A project manager is leading a project with a tight budget. The team has completed all required features, but there is some remaining budget. The sponsor suggests adding a few extra features. What are TWO potential issues the project manager should consider before approving? (Choose TWO.)

Trap 1: The extra features are necessary for regulatory compliance

Regulatory compliance is mandatory work, not optional scope, so it would never be a discretionary add-on funded from leftover budget. It tempts because compliance features do consume budget and must be delivered, but here all required features are already complete, making this irrelevant to the decision.

Trap 2: The extra features will improve customer satisfaction

Improving customer satisfaction is a benefit, not an issue, so it cannot be one of the two problems the project manager must weigh. It tempts because scope additions genuinely can raise satisfaction when budget and schedule allow, but the stem asks for risks of gold-plating under a tight budget.

Trap 3: The extra features are part of the original scope

Features already delivered within the approved scope cannot be "extra"; adding them is not scope creep, so this is not a valid concern. It is tempting because scope language appears relevant, and would be correct if the sponsor proposed functionality never baselined in the original requirements.

A
The extra features are necessary for regulatory compliance
Why it fails: Regulatory compliance is mandatory work, not optional scope, so it would never be a discretionary add-on funded from leftover budget. It tempts because compliance features do consume budget and must be delivered, but here all required features are already complete, making this irrelevant to the decision.
B
The extra features may cause schedule delays
Adding unplanned features expands scope beyond the agreed baseline, consuming schedule float and pushing delivery dates. Even with remaining budget, the team's capacity is finite, so extra work risks late completion and compresses testing time.
C
The extra features will improve customer satisfaction
Why it fails: Improving customer satisfaction is a benefit, not an issue, so it cannot be one of the two problems the project manager must weigh. It tempts because scope additions genuinely can raise satisfaction when budget and schedule allow, but the stem asks for risks of gold-plating under a tight budget.
D
The extra features may increase testing and maintenance costs long-term
Adding unplanned features expands the test surface and creates code that must be maintained through the product's life, consuming budget beyond the current project. This directly addresses the tight-budget constraint, since long-term testing and maintenance costs are not covered by the remaining funds.
E
The extra features are part of the original scope
Why it fails: Features already delivered within the approved scope cannot be "extra"; adding them is not scope creep, so this is not a valid concern. It is tempting because scope language appears relevant, and would be correct if the sponsor proposed functionality never baselined in the original requirements.

Question 5mediummultiple choice

A project to build a new office is in the planning phase. The project manager wants to use a methodology that allows for flexibility in design while still having a clear upfront plan for the overall construction. Which approach is BEST?

Trap 1: Agile

Agile delivers design flexibility through short iterations, but it does not produce the clear upfront plan for overall construction the stem requires. It suits software or discovery work where scope emerges progressively. For a fixed-scope office build with staged approvals, an upfront baseline plus controlled flexibility is needed instead.

Trap 2: Scrum

Scrum delivers iterative increments for evolving product backlogs, not a fixed upfront construction plan with design flexibility inside it. It tempts because Scrum handles changing requirements well, but the stem needs a defined overall plan plus controlled design latitude, which a predictive approach with staged design provides.

Trap 3: Predictive (waterfall)

Predictive fixes scope, schedule and design at the outset, so late design changes require formal change control rather than iterative adaptation. It suits construction where requirements are stable and regulatory sign-off is fixed. Here the stem explicitly demands design flexibility alongside an upfront plan, which predictive cannot deliver.

A
Agile
Why it fails: Agile delivers design flexibility through short iterations, but it does not produce the clear upfront plan for overall construction the stem requires. It suits software or discovery work where scope emerges progressively. For a fixed-scope office build with staged approvals, an upfront baseline plus controlled flexibility is needed instead.
B
Hybrid
A hybrid approach combines a predictive, upfront construction plan with iterative design flexibility, satisfying the stem's dual constraint of clear overall planning plus adaptable design. Pure predictive fixes design early; pure agile lacks the upfront construction baseline the project requires.
C
Scrum
Why it fails: Scrum delivers iterative increments for evolving product backlogs, not a fixed upfront construction plan with design flexibility inside it. It tempts because Scrum handles changing requirements well, but the stem needs a defined overall plan plus controlled design latitude, which a predictive approach with staged design provides.
D
Predictive (waterfall)
Why it fails: Predictive fixes scope, schedule and design at the outset, so late design changes require formal change control rather than iterative adaptation. It suits construction where requirements are stable and regulatory sign-off is fixed. Here the stem explicitly demands design flexibility alongside an upfront plan, which predictive cannot deliver.

Question 6mediummultiple choice

A project manager is estimating costs for a new software development project. The company has completed three similar projects in the past. Which cost estimation technique is most appropriate in this scenario?

Trap 1: Bottom-up estimation

Bottom-up estimation aggregates work-package-level cost estimates, requiring a decomposed WBS that does not yet exist for this new project. Three similar completed projects supply directly comparable historical actuals, making analogous estimation appropriate. Bottom-up suits projects with a detailed, stable scope already broken into granular components.

Trap 2: Parametric estimation

Parametric estimation relies on statistical relationships between historical data and variables like lines of code or function points, but the stem specifies three similar past projects, not a scalable database of metrics. This technique is tempting because it offers rapid, formula-based cost projections for repetitive tasks, and it would be correct if the company had extensive historical data from dozens of projects to derive reliable cost-per-unit parameters.

Trap 3: Three-point estimation

Three-point estimation weights optimistic, pessimistic and most-likely values for a single task; it does not exploit historical actuals. With three comparable completed projects, analogous estimation using those actual costs is the fitting technique. Three-point suits novel work lacking reliable historical data, where uncertainty ranges must be derived from expert judgement.

A
Analogous estimation
Analogous estimation uses historical cost data from comparable completed projects to derive the new estimate. With three similar past software projects available, this top-down technique is quick and appropriate, especially when detailed information is limited during early estimating.
B
Bottom-up estimation
Why it fails: Bottom-up estimation aggregates work-package-level cost estimates, requiring a decomposed WBS that does not yet exist for this new project. Three similar completed projects supply directly comparable historical actuals, making analogous estimation appropriate. Bottom-up suits projects with a detailed, stable scope already broken into granular components.
C
Parametric estimation
Why it fails: Parametric estimation relies on statistical relationships between historical data and variables like lines of code or function points, but the stem specifies three similar past projects, not a scalable database of metrics. This technique is tempting because it offers rapid, formula-based cost projections for repetitive tasks, and it would be correct if the company had extensive historical data from dozens of projects to derive reliable cost-per-unit parameters.
D
Three-point estimation
Why it fails: Three-point estimation weights optimistic, pessimistic and most-likely values for a single task; it does not exploit historical actuals. With three comparable completed projects, analogous estimation using those actual costs is the fitting technique. Three-point suits novel work lacking reliable historical data, where uncertainty ranges must be derived from expert judgement.

Question 7mediummultiple choice

During sprint planning, the team uses a technique where each member privately selects a card representing a number of story points for a user story. After revealing, they discuss discrepancies. This technique is known as:

Trap 1: Pairs programming

Pair programming is two developers sharing one workstation writing code together, involving no estimation cards or story points. It is tempting as another agile practise, and would be correct when the goal is continuous code review and knowledge sharing during development rather than sizing work in sprint planning.

Trap 2: T-shirt sizing

T-shirt sizing assigns relative sizes (small, medium, large) rather than numeric story points, so it cannot produce the card values described. It is tempting because it is also a relative estimation technique used in agile planning, and would be correct when the team wants coarse, non-numeric sizing early in backlog refinement.

Trap 3: Delphi technique

The Delphi technique gathers anonymous expert estimates through successive written rounds with a facilitator, not simultaneous card reveals by the whole team. It is tempting as another consensus-building estimation method, and would be correct for forecasting when experts are geographically dispersed and cannot meet face to face.

A
Pairs programming
Why it fails: Pair programming is two developers sharing one workstation writing code together, involving no estimation cards or story points. It is tempting as another agile practise, and would be correct when the goal is continuous code review and knowledge sharing during development rather than sizing work in sprint planning.
B
Planning poker
Planning poker has each team member privately choose a card showing story points, then reveal simultaneously and discuss divergent estimates until consensus forms. This matches the stem's private-selection-then-discussion sequence exactly, distinguishing it from other estimation techniques such as affinity estimating or T-shirt sizing.
C
T-shirt sizing
Why it fails: T-shirt sizing assigns relative sizes (small, medium, large) rather than numeric story points, so it cannot produce the card values described. It is tempting because it is also a relative estimation technique used in agile planning, and would be correct when the team wants coarse, non-numeric sizing early in backlog refinement.
D
Delphi technique
Why it fails: The Delphi technique gathers anonymous expert estimates through successive written rounds with a facilitator, not simultaneous card reveals by the whole team. It is tempting as another consensus-building estimation method, and would be correct for forecasting when experts are geographically dispersed and cannot meet face to face.

Question 8easymultiple choice

A project manager is assigned to a new software development project with clearly defined requirements and minimal expected changes. Which project management methodology is most appropriate for this scenario?

Trap 1: Kanban

Kanban manages continuous flow with work-in-progress limits rather than fixed scope, schedule and budget baselines. It is tempting because it is a lightweight visual method for software teams, but projects with clearly defined requirements and minimal change suit predictive waterfall planning.

Trap 2: Agile

Agile suits evolving requirements delivered through short iterative increments, so fixed, clearly defined requirements with minimal change remove its main advantage. It is tempting because Agile is widely used for software development, but predictive waterfall fits stable scope where change is not expected.

Trap 3: Hybrid

Hybrid blends predictive planning with iterative delivery, adding Agile overhead that stable, clearly defined requirements do not need. It is tempting because it appears to combine the strengths of both approaches, but a purely predictive methodology matches fixed scope with minimal expected change.

A
Kanban
Why it fails: Kanban manages continuous flow with work-in-progress limits rather than fixed scope, schedule and budget baselines. It is tempting because it is a lightweight visual method for software teams, but projects with clearly defined requirements and minimal change suit predictive waterfall planning.
B
Agile
Why it fails: Agile suits evolving requirements delivered through short iterative increments, so fixed, clearly defined requirements with minimal change remove its main advantage. It is tempting because Agile is widely used for software development, but predictive waterfall fits stable scope where change is not expected.
C
Hybrid
Why it fails: Hybrid blends predictive planning with iterative delivery, adding Agile overhead that stable, clearly defined requirements do not need. It is tempting because it appears to combine the strengths of both approaches, but a purely predictive methodology matches fixed scope with minimal expected change.
D
Predictive (Waterfall)
Predictive methodology fixes scope, schedule and cost baselines up front and controls changes through formal approval. With clearly defined requirements and minimal expected change, this sequential approach satisfies the stem's stability constraint better than adaptive alternatives.

Question 9mediummultiple choice

A project manager is estimating the cost of a new software development project. Since the project is similar to a previous one, the manager uses the cost of the previous project as a basis, adjusting for known differences. Which cost estimation technique is being used?

Trap 1: Parametric estimation

Parametric estimation multiplies unit rates by quantities via a statistical model, such as cost per line of code. It needs measurable drivers, not a single analogous project; the stem describes adjusting one prior project's actual cost, which is analogy.

Trap 2: Bottom-up estimation

Bottom-up estimation sums individual work-package estimates into a total, requiring detailed decomposition of every component. It is correct for well-defined scopes needing high accuracy, but the stem uses one whole previous project as the baseline, which is analogy.

Trap 3: Three-point estimation

Three-point estimation averages optimistic, most likely and pessimistic figures using a weighted formula, which requires per-activity ranges rather than a single historical total. It suits risk-heavy tasks with uncertain durations, not analogy-based scaling of one comparable past project.

A
Parametric estimation
Why it fails: Parametric estimation multiplies unit rates by quantities via a statistical model, such as cost per line of code. It needs measurable drivers, not a single analogous project; the stem describes adjusting one prior project's actual cost, which is analogy.
B
Bottom-up estimation
Why it fails: Bottom-up estimation sums individual work-package estimates into a total, requiring detailed decomposition of every component. It is correct for well-defined scopes needing high accuracy, but the stem uses one whole previous project as the baseline, which is analogy.
C
Analogous estimation
Analogous estimation uses historical data from a comparable past project as the basis, then adjusts for known differences. This top-down technique suits the scenario because the new project closely resembles the previous one, making prior cost a reliable anchor.
D
Three-point estimation
Why it fails: Three-point estimation averages optimistic, most likely and pessimistic figures using a weighted formula, which requires per-activity ranges rather than a single historical total. It suits risk-heavy tasks with uncertain durations, not analogy-based scaling of one comparable past project.

Question 10easymultiple choice

A project manager is defining the project life cycle for a construction project where requirements are well-defined and unlikely to change. Which project management methodology is most appropriate for this scenario?

Trap 1: Agile

Agile delivers work in short iterations with continuous requirement reprioritisation, which suits evolving or unclear scope. Here the requirements are fixed and well-defined, so iterative re-planning adds overhead without benefit. Agile would be the right choice for a project where customer needs emerge during delivery.

Trap 2: Hybrid

Hybrid blends predictive and adaptive approaches, adding iterative elements that suit evolving or uncertain requirements; stable, well-defined construction requirements gain nothing from that overhead. It is tempting when organisations already practise Agile, but a predictive waterfall methodology fits fixed scope, sequential phases and change-controlled delivery.

Trap 3: Scrum

Scrum is an Agile framework built on short sprints and a product backlog that absorbs changing requirements. With requirements already well-defined and unlikely to change, sprint-based replanning provides no advantage. Scrum would be correct for complex product development where scope evolves through frequent stakeholder feedback.

A
Agile
Why it fails: Agile delivers work in short iterations with continuous requirement reprioritisation, which suits evolving or unclear scope. Here the requirements are fixed and well-defined, so iterative re-planning adds overhead without benefit. Agile would be the right choice for a project where customer needs emerge during delivery.
B
Predictive
Predictive methodology suits this scenario because stable, well-defined requirements allow sequential phase planning with baselined scope, schedule and cost. Its phase-gate controls manage dependencies and approvals typical of construction, satisfying the stem's constraint that requirements are unlikely to change, unlike adaptive approaches that expect evolving scope.
C
Hybrid
Why it fails: Hybrid blends predictive and adaptive approaches, adding iterative elements that suit evolving or uncertain requirements; stable, well-defined construction requirements gain nothing from that overhead. It is tempting when organisations already practise Agile, but a predictive waterfall methodology fits fixed scope, sequential phases and change-controlled delivery.
D
Scrum
Why it fails: Scrum is an Agile framework built on short sprints and a product backlog that absorbs changing requirements. With requirements already well-defined and unlikely to change, sprint-based replanning provides no advantage. Scrum would be correct for complex product development where scope evolves through frequent stakeholder feedback.

Question 11hardmultiple choice

A project manager is using a technique to identify risks by gathering a group of experts who provide anonymous input through multiple rounds of questionnaires. This technique avoids groupthink and allows experts to refine their opinions. Which risk identification technique is being used?

Trap 1: Brainstorming

Brainstorming gathers experts in a facilitated group discussion where contributions are openly voiced, so it does not provide anonymity across questionnaire rounds. It is tempting as a common identification technique, but it would be correct where open idea generation, not groupthink suppression, is the goal.

Trap 2: Assumptions analysis

Assumptions analysis tests the validity of documented project assumptions to expose risks arising from inaccuracy. It is tempting because it is a genuine identification technique, but it would be correct when reviewing an assumptions log, not when running anonymous multi-round expert questionnaires.

Trap 3: SWOT analysis

SWOT analysis examines internal strengths and weaknesses against external opportunities and threats in a single structured session, with no anonymous questionnaire rounds. It is tempting because it is a recognised risk identification tool, but it would be chosen when framing strategic context, not for iterative expert consensus.

A
Brainstorming
Why it fails: Brainstorming gathers experts in a facilitated group discussion where contributions are openly voiced, so it does not provide anonymity across questionnaire rounds. It is tempting as a common identification technique, but it would be correct where open idea generation, not groupthink suppression, is the goal.
B
Delphi technique
The Delphi technique satisfies the anonymity and iteration constraints by circulating questionnaires to experts across several rounds, with responses aggregated and fed back each time. Experts refine opinions without face-to-face pressure, eliminating groupthink. Unlike brainstorming or nominal group technique, participants never meet, which is precisely the mechanism the stem describes.
C
Assumptions analysis
Why it fails: Assumptions analysis tests the validity of documented project assumptions to expose risks arising from inaccuracy. It is tempting because it is a genuine identification technique, but it would be correct when reviewing an assumptions log, not when running anonymous multi-round expert questionnaires.
D
SWOT analysis
Why it fails: SWOT analysis examines internal strengths and weaknesses against external opportunities and threats in a single structured session, with no anonymous questionnaire rounds. It is tempting because it is a recognised risk identification tool, but it would be chosen when framing strategic context, not for iterative expert consensus.

Question 12mediummultiple choice

During the executing phase, a project manager observes that team members are starting to collaborate and share ideas openly. According to Tuckman's stages of team development, which stage is the team likely in?

Trap 1: Performing

Performing is the mature stage where the team operates autonomously and resolves problems without direction; collaboration is established rather than newly emerging. The stem describes the transition into cooperative working, which is norming. Performing would fit a team consistently delivering with minimal leader involvement.

Trap 2: Forming

Forming is the initial orientation stage, where members are polite, dependent on the leader and unclear about roles; open collaboration and idea sharing have not yet emerged. The described behaviour indicates the norming stage, where cohesion and agreed working methods develop. Forming would fit a team only just assembled.

Trap 3: Storming

Storming involves conflict, resistance to leadership and clashing working styles, not the open idea sharing described. The stem's collaboration signals norming, where roles and norms solidify. Storming would be the correct answer if the team were arguing over goals, authority or task ownership.

A
Performing
Why it fails: Performing is the mature stage where the team operates autonomously and resolves problems without direction; collaboration is established rather than newly emerging. The stem describes the transition into cooperative working, which is norming. Performing would fit a team consistently delivering with minimal leader involvement.
B
Forming
Why it fails: Forming is the initial orientation stage, where members are polite, dependent on the leader and unclear about roles; open collaboration and idea sharing have not yet emerged. The described behaviour indicates the norming stage, where cohesion and agreed working methods develop. Forming would fit a team only just assembled.
C
Norming
Norming is marked by resolving differences and developing cohesion, so members collaborate and share ideas openly. This matches the stem's observation during executing, where relationships stabilise and trust grows. Storming still involves conflict, while performing focuses on task delivery rather than relationship-building.
D
Storming
Why it fails: Storming involves conflict, resistance to leadership and clashing working styles, not the open idea sharing described. The stem's collaboration signals norming, where roles and norms solidify. Storming would be the correct answer if the team were arguing over goals, authority or task ownership.

Question 13easymultiple choice

A project team is identifying risks. They gather subject matter experts anonymously and use a facilitator to collect their responses iteratively until consensus is reached. Which risk identification technique is being used?

Trap 1: Assumptions analysis

Assumptions analysis examines documented project assumptions for inaccuracy, instability or incompleteness; it does not collect expert responses anonymously across iterative rounds. It tempts because assumptions feed risk registers, and it would be correct when validating the log of assumptions underpinning the project plan.

Trap 2: SWOT analysis

SWOT analysis examines internal strengths and weaknesses alongside external opportunities and threats, but it does not involve iterative anonymous collection of expert responses through a facilitator. The scenario describes the Delphi technique, which relies on repeated anonymous rounds to build consensus. SWOT is tempting because it is a common strategic risk identification tool, and it would be correct when the team needs to categorise risks by internal versus external origin rather than achieving anonymous expert convergence.

Trap 3: Brainstorming

Brainstorming gathers participants together in a group session to generate ideas openly, without the anonymity or repeated facilitated rounds the stem describes. It tempts because brainstorming also identifies risks, and it would be correct when a team wants rapid, unrestricted idea generation in a single meeting.

A
Assumptions analysis
Why it fails: Assumptions analysis examines documented project assumptions for inaccuracy, instability or incompleteness; it does not collect expert responses anonymously across iterative rounds. It tempts because assumptions feed risk registers, and it would be correct when validating the log of assumptions underpinning the project plan.
B
SWOT analysis
Why it fails: SWOT analysis examines internal strengths and weaknesses alongside external opportunities and threats, but it does not involve iterative anonymous collection of expert responses through a facilitator. The scenario describes the Delphi technique, which relies on repeated anonymous rounds to build consensus. SWOT is tempting because it is a common strategic risk identification tool, and it would be correct when the team needs to categorise risks by internal versus external origin rather than achieving anonymous expert convergence.
C
Brainstorming
Why it fails: Brainstorming gathers participants together in a group session to generate ideas openly, without the anonymity or repeated facilitated rounds the stem describes. It tempts because brainstorming also identifies risks, and it would be correct when a team wants rapid, unrestricted idea generation in a single meeting.
D
Delphi technique
Anonymous expert input gathered iteratively by a facilitator until consensus is reached defines the Delphi technique, directly satisfying the stem's anonymity and iteration constraints. Unlike brainstorming or nominal group technique, Delphi removes groupthink by keeping panellists unidentified across rounds.

Question 14easymultiple choice

A project manager is drafting the document that formally outlines how the project team will be structured, how often status reports will be delivered, and which tools will be used for tracking tasks. This document will be reviewed and approved before execution begins. Which document is the project manager creating?

Trap 1: Statement of work

A statement of work defines deliverables, scope, and acceptance criteria, typically from the customer or vendor side. It does not specify internal team structure, status reporting frequency, or tracking tools, so it does not match the execution-focused document being described.

Trap 2: Business case

A business case justifies why the project should be undertaken by comparing costs, benefits, and risks to support a go/no-go decision. It does not describe team structure, reporting intervals, or task-tracking tools, so it cannot be the document the manager is drafting for execution guidance.

Trap 3: Project charter

The project charter formally authorizes the project and names the project manager; it is issued by the sponsor, not authored by the manager to describe reporting cadence and tooling. Here the manager is detailing execution logistics such as status report frequency and tracking tools, which fall outside the charter's high-level authorization purpose.

A
Statement of work
Why it fails: A statement of work defines deliverables, scope, and acceptance criteria, typically from the customer or vendor side. It does not specify internal team structure, status reporting frequency, or tracking tools, so it does not match the execution-focused document being described.
B
Project management plan
The project management plan is the integrated document that describes how the project will be executed, monitored, controlled, and closed, including team structure, communication cadence, and tooling. Because the manager is defining reporting frequency, team organization, and tracking tools as a single approved baseline for execution, this is exactly the artifact being built.
C
Business case
Why it fails: A business case justifies why the project should be undertaken by comparing costs, benefits, and risks to support a go/no-go decision. It does not describe team structure, reporting intervals, or task-tracking tools, so it cannot be the document the manager is drafting for execution guidance.
D
Project charter
Why it fails: The project charter formally authorizes the project and names the project manager; it is issued by the sponsor, not authored by the manager to describe reporting cadence and tooling. Here the manager is detailing execution logistics such as status report frequency and tracking tools, which fall outside the charter's high-level authorization purpose.

Question 15mediummulti select

A project manager is finalizing the resource management plan for a project that depends heavily on a scarce database administrator skill set. The sponsor asks which activities belong to the Acquire Resources process rather than to Plan Resource Management. Which TWO activities should the project manager identify? (Choose two.)

Trap 1: Defining the roles, responsibilities, and reporting relationships…

Defining roles, responsibilities, and reporting relationships occurs during Plan Resource Management, where the team charter, responsibility assignment matrix, and organizational chart are produced. It establishes how resources will be managed rather than obtaining them. This activity therefore belongs to planning, not to the process that secures the scarce database administrators for the work.

Trap 2: Estimating the cost of the database administrator time required for…

Estimating resource costs belongs to cost and resource planning, not to acquiring the people. The estimate informs the budget and supports negotiations, but producing it does not place a named database administrator on the project. Selecting this activity would confuse planning analysis with the assignment action the sponsor specifically requested.

Trap 3: Creating a resource histogram that shows the number of resources…

A resource histogram is a planning output that displays resource demand over time and supports scheduling decisions. It helps the project manager understand how many database administrators are required and when, but it does not obtain them. Since the sponsor asked about acquiring resources, this planning artifact is the wrong category of activity.

A
Defining the roles, responsibilities, and reporting relationships for the project team.
Why it fails: Defining roles, responsibilities, and reporting relationships occurs during Plan Resource Management, where the team charter, responsibility assignment matrix, and organizational chart are produced. It establishes how resources will be managed rather than obtaining them. This activity therefore belongs to planning, not to the process that secures the scarce database administrators for the work.
B
Estimating the cost of the database administrator time required for each work package.
Why it fails: Estimating resource costs belongs to cost and resource planning, not to acquiring the people. The estimate informs the budget and supports negotiations, but producing it does not place a named database administrator on the project. Selecting this activity would confuse planning analysis with the assignment action the sponsor specifically requested.
C
Assigning the selected database administrators to project activities and confirming their availability.
Assigning selected team members to activities and verifying their availability is part of Acquire Resources. Once negotiations succeed, the project manager records the assignment against the schedule and confirms that the individuals can support the planned dates. This finalizes the acquisition step for the scarce skill set and is distinct from the planning activities that precede it.
D
Creating a resource histogram that shows the number of resources needed per time period.
Why it fails: A resource histogram is a planning output that displays resource demand over time and supports scheduling decisions. It helps the project manager understand how many database administrators are required and when, but it does not obtain them. Since the sponsor asked about acquiring resources, this planning artifact is the wrong category of activity.
E
Negotiating with functional managers to assign the needed database administrators to the project team.
Negotiating for specific people is a core activity of Acquire Resources, which obtains the human resources needed to complete the work. Because the database administrator skill is scarce, the project manager must confirm availability and secure commitments from the owning managers. This action follows planning and produces the actual team assignment, matching the process the sponsor is asking about.

Question 16easymultiple choice

A project manager is preparing a procurement document that asks vendors to provide a price for a specific product. Which type of document is this?

Trap 1: Request for proposal (RFP)

An RFP solicits proposals describing how vendors would meet stated requirements, not a straight price for a defined product. Pricing a specific, already-specified product calls for a request for quotation (RFQ). RFP suits complex solutions where vendors propose approaches and terms.

Trap 2: Request for information (RFI)

An RFI gathers information about vendor capabilities before requirements are defined, so it collects no pricing. Asking vendors to price a specific product is a request for quotation (RFQ). RFI fits early market research, before a procurement document can specify the product.

Trap 3: Statement of work (SOW)

A statement of work defines deliverables, scope and acceptance criteria for agreed work; it is not a solicitation requesting vendor prices. Pricing a specific product uses a request for quotation (RFQ). SOW fits after selection, contracting a vendor for services.

A
Request for quotation (RFQ)
A request for quotation asks vendors to price a specific, already-defined product, satisfying the stem's requirement for a document seeking price only. It differs from an RFP, which solicits solution proposals, and an RFI, which gathers capability information.
B
Request for proposal (RFP)
Why it fails: An RFP solicits proposals describing how vendors would meet stated requirements, not a straight price for a defined product. Pricing a specific, already-specified product calls for a request for quotation (RFQ). RFP suits complex solutions where vendors propose approaches and terms.
C
Request for information (RFI)
Why it fails: An RFI gathers information about vendor capabilities before requirements are defined, so it collects no pricing. Asking vendors to price a specific product is a request for quotation (RFQ). RFI fits early market research, before a procurement document can specify the product.
D
Statement of work (SOW)
Why it fails: A statement of work defines deliverables, scope and acceptance criteria for agreed work; it is not a solicitation requesting vendor prices. Pricing a specific product uses a request for quotation (RFQ). SOW fits after selection, contracting a vendor for services.

Question 17mediummultiple choice

A project team is identifying risks. They gather a group of experts who provide anonymous responses to a questionnaire. The facilitator aggregates the responses and shares them, then the experts revise their answers. Which technique is being used?

Trap 1: Brainstorming

Brainstorming gathers experts to generate ideas openly and collectively, so responses are attributed and discussed in the room rather than anonymised and statistically aggregated across rounds. It is tempting because both techniques use expert groups for risk identification, but brainstorming lacks the questionnaire-and-feedback loop that defines Delphi.

Trap 2: SWOT analysis

SWOT analysis examines internal strengths and weaknesses against external opportunities and threats, producing a strategic position rather than anonymous iterative expert estimates. It is tempting because SWOT is a recognised risk-identification input, but it neither anonymises respondents nor aggregates and redistributes answers for revision as the Delphi technique does.

Trap 3: Assumptions analysis

Assumptions analysis tests the validity of documented project assumptions to expose risks arising from inaccuracy or inconsistency, so it examines existing statements rather than collecting anonymous expert estimates. It is tempting because assumptions analysis is a genuine risk-identification technique, but it involves no questionnaire, anonymity or iterative revision of responses.

A
Brainstorming
Why it fails: Brainstorming gathers experts to generate ideas openly and collectively, so responses are attributed and discussed in the room rather than anonymised and statistically aggregated across rounds. It is tempting because both techniques use expert groups for risk identification, but brainstorming lacks the questionnaire-and-feedback loop that defines Delphi.
B
Delphi technique
The Delphi technique uses iterative rounds of anonymous questionnaires, letting experts revise answers after seeing the aggregated group response. This directly satisfies the stem's constraints: anonymity, facilitator aggregation, and revision. Unlike brainstorming or nominal group technique, Delphi removes face-to-face pressure, converging expert opinion without direct confrontation.
C
SWOT analysis
Why it fails: SWOT analysis examines internal strengths and weaknesses against external opportunities and threats, producing a strategic position rather than anonymous iterative expert estimates. It is tempting because SWOT is a recognised risk-identification input, but it neither anonymises respondents nor aggregates and redistributes answers for revision as the Delphi technique does.
D
Assumptions analysis
Why it fails: Assumptions analysis tests the validity of documented project assumptions to expose risks arising from inaccuracy or inconsistency, so it examines existing statements rather than collecting anonymous expert estimates. It is tempting because assumptions analysis is a genuine risk-identification technique, but it involves no questionnaire, anonymity or iterative revision of responses.

Question 18mediummultiple choice

A project has a constraint that a specific software must be used because it is the standard in the organization. The project manager must work within this limitation. What type of constraint is this?

Trap 1: Discretionary dependency

A discretionary dependency is a schedule sequencing choice the team can change, not a limitation on which software may be used. It is tempting because both concern project decisions, and would be correct if the question asked about optional task ordering, such as choosing to run testing after a preferred milestone.

Trap 2: External constraint

External constraints originate outside the organisation, such as regulatory, market or supplier-imposed conditions; an internally mandated software standard is imposed by the organisation itself. It is tempting because the standard may originate from a vendor, and would be correct if a regulator or customer contract dictated the software.

Trap 3: Resource constraint

Resource constraints limit availability of people, equipment, budget or materials; mandated software is a technical standard, not a scarcity of resources. It is tempting because software is an asset the team consumes, and would be correct if the constraint were insufficient licensed seats or specialists to deliver the work.

A
Discretionary dependency
Why it fails: A discretionary dependency is a schedule sequencing choice the team can change, not a limitation on which software may be used. It is tempting because both concern project decisions, and would be correct if the question asked about optional task ordering, such as choosing to run testing after a preferred milestone.
B
External constraint
Why it fails: External constraints originate outside the organisation, such as regulatory, market or supplier-imposed conditions; an internally mandated software standard is imposed by the organisation itself. It is tempting because the standard may originate from a vendor, and would be correct if a regulator or customer contract dictated the software.
C
Resource constraint
Why it fails: Resource constraints limit availability of people, equipment, budget or materials; mandated software is a technical standard, not a scarcity of resources. It is tempting because software is an asset the team consumes, and would be correct if the constraint were insufficient licensed seats or specialists to deliver the work.
D
Technical constraint
A mandated organisational software standard restricts the solution space through imposed technology, making it a technical constraint. It satisfies the stem's requirement that the project manager must work within a fixed limitation on which tools or platforms may be used, rather than a schedule, budget or resource restriction.

Question 19mediummultiple choice

A project manager is working in a matrix organization. The project team members report to both the project manager and their functional managers. The project manager has moderate authority and shares resources. This type of matrix is known as:

Trap 1: Functional

A functional organisation gives the functional manager sole authority over staff; project managers there hold little to no formal power, and team members do not report to both managers. It is tempting because the stem mentions functional managers, yet the shared reporting and moderate project authority described indicate a balanced matrix.

Trap 2: Strong matrix

A strong matrix grants the project manager primary authority over resources, with functional managers in a supporting role. It is tempting because both matrix types involve dual reporting, but the stem specifies moderate authority and shared resources, which define a balanced matrix rather than the strong form.

Trap 3: Weak matrix

In a weak matrix the functional manager retains primary authority and the project manager's role is largely coordinator or expediter, with limited power over resources. It is tempting because shared reporting exists, but the stem's moderate authority and shared resources describe a balanced matrix, not the weak form.

A
Balanced matrix
A balanced matrix matches the stem: the project manager holds moderate authority while functional managers retain control of resources, so team members report to both. Weak matrices give the project manager limited authority, whereas strong matrices grant high authority and dedicated resources.
B
Functional
Why it fails: A functional organisation gives the functional manager sole authority over staff; project managers there hold little to no formal power, and team members do not report to both managers. It is tempting because the stem mentions functional managers, yet the shared reporting and moderate project authority described indicate a balanced matrix.
C
Strong matrix
Why it fails: A strong matrix grants the project manager primary authority over resources, with functional managers in a supporting role. It is tempting because both matrix types involve dual reporting, but the stem specifies moderate authority and shared resources, which define a balanced matrix rather than the strong form.
D
Weak matrix
Why it fails: In a weak matrix the functional manager retains primary authority and the project manager's role is largely coordinator or expediter, with limited power over resources. It is tempting because shared reporting exists, but the stem's moderate authority and shared resources describe a balanced matrix, not the weak form.

Question 20mediummultiple choice

During project execution, the project team completes a deliverable that exceeds the specified requirements by adding extra features without authorization. This is an example of which concept?

Trap 1: Scope creep

Scope creep is unauthorised additions to the agreed scope baseline, whereas this describes gold plating: extra features delivered voluntarily without a change request. Scope creep is tempting because both involve unapproved work, and it is correct when stakeholders gradually expand requirements beyond what was baselined.

Trap 2: Value analysis

Value analysis examines whether a component's function justifies its cost, typically during design or procurement reviews; it does not describe unauthorised additions to a deliverable. It is tempting because added features appear to increase value, and it would be correct when assessing whether a function's benefit warrants its expense.

Trap 3: Progressive elaboration

Progressive elaboration is the iterative refinement of project and product detail as understanding improves, which is planned and sanctioned; it does not cover unapproved additions beyond agreed requirements. It is tempting because both involve changing detail during execution, and it would be correct when requirements are legitimately detailed further through successive iterations.

A
Gold plating
Gold plating occurs when the team adds unrequested features beyond the agreed scope, exactly as described. It satisfies the scenario's constraint of unauthorised extra functionality, consuming budget and time without approval. Unlike scope creep, which is uncontrolled change from stakeholders, gold plating is extra work initiated by the team itself.
B
Scope creep
Why it fails: Scope creep is unauthorised additions to the agreed scope baseline, whereas this describes gold plating: extra features delivered voluntarily without a change request. Scope creep is tempting because both involve unapproved work, and it is correct when stakeholders gradually expand requirements beyond what was baselined.
C
Value analysis
Why it fails: Value analysis examines whether a component's function justifies its cost, typically during design or procurement reviews; it does not describe unauthorised additions to a deliverable. It is tempting because added features appear to increase value, and it would be correct when assessing whether a function's benefit warrants its expense.
D
Progressive elaboration
Why it fails: Progressive elaboration is the iterative refinement of project and product detail as understanding improves, which is planned and sanctioned; it does not cover unapproved additions beyond agreed requirements. It is tempting because both involve changing detail during execution, and it would be correct when requirements are legitimately detailed further through successive iterations.