CAPM Business Analysis Frameworks Practice Question
During the requirements elicitation for a new software system, the business analyst (BA) conducts a series of interviews with stakeholders. After the first interview, the BA realizes that the questions are too technical and the stakeholders are struggling to provide clear requirements. What should the BA do to improve the elicitation process?
⚠ Common exam trap
Many candidates assume providing a glossary (Option A) is sufficient to bridge the technical gap, but the CAPM exam tests the deeper principle that the BA must adapt the elicitation technique itself to match the stakeholder's language and perspective, not just translate terms.
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
✓
Revise the interview questions to be more open-ended and focus on business outcomes.
The BA's questions are too technical, causing stakeholders to focus on implementation details rather than their actual needs. By revising questions to be open-ended and focused on business outcomes, the BA shifts the conversation from 'how the system should work' to 'what business problem needs to be solved,' which is the core of effective requirements elicitation. This approach aligns with the BABOK's principle of understanding stakeholder needs before defining technical solutions.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
Continue with the same questions but provide a glossary of technical terms.
Why it's wrong here
A glossary does not fix questions pitched at the wrong technical level; stakeholders still cannot articulate needs. Continuing unchanged wastes interview time. A glossary suits sessions where terminology alone confuses participants, not where the questions themselves are too technical.
- ✓
Revise the interview questions to be more open-ended and focus on business outcomes.
Why this is correct
Revising questions to be open-ended and outcome-focused shifts elicitation from technical detail to business need, which is precisely the constraint the stem identifies: stakeholders cannot articulate requirements when questioned technically. Open-ended prompts let them describe goals and value in their own language, yielding clearer, more complete requirements.
- ✗
Replace interviews with a review of existing documentation.
Why it's wrong here
Documentation review captures only what was previously recorded, so it cannot resolve unclear requirements or surface current stakeholder needs. It is tempting because it avoids difficult interviews and is genuinely useful for background research before elicitation, but it cannot substitute for direct stakeholder dialogue.
- ✗
Reduce the number of stakeholders to only those with technical backgrounds.
Why it's wrong here
Narrowing participation to technical staff excludes the business stakeholders whose domain knowledge defines the requirements, so the elicitation gap persists. It is tempting because technical interviewees answer technical questions fluently, but that suits architecture validation sessions, not gathering business needs from non-technical users.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
Courseiva writes every CAPM question from scratch — 451 in total, each with an explanation and a wrong-answer breakdown. None are copied from real exams or 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 CAPM practice question is part of Courseiva's free PMI 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 CAPM exam.