PMP Process — Managing Technical Aspects Practice Question
Your project is facing significant schedule delays due to unforeseen regulatory changes. You need to compress the schedule. Which TWO techniques are appropriate for schedule compression?
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
✓
Fast-tracking: performing activities in parallel that were originally sequential
Fast-tracking (A) is a valid schedule compression technique because it overlaps activities that were originally planned to run sequentially, which can shorten the overall duration, though it increases risk and may require rework. Crashing (B) is also valid because it adds resources (such as additional staff or overtime) to critical path activities to shorten their duration, typically at increased cost. Adding buffers (C) does not compress the schedule; it adds contingency time and therefore lengthens or protects the schedule rather than shortening it. Resource leveling (D) adjusts the schedule to resolve resource over-allocation and may actually extend the duration, so it is not a compression technique. Reducing scope (E) changes the project's deliverables rather than compressing the existing schedule, so it is not an appropriate schedule compression method.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✓
Fast-tracking: performing activities in parallel that were originally sequential
Why this is correct
Fast-tracking is a schedule compression technique where activities or phases that would normally be performed sequentially are instead performed in parallel or with some overlap. This strategy aims to shorten the overall project duration by starting subsequent activities before their predecessors are fully completed. While it can significantly reduce the project timeline, fast-tracking inherently increases project risk due to potential rework if early assumptions prove incorrect, and it often demands more intense communication and coordination.
- ✓
Crashing: adding resources to critical path activities
Why this is correct
Crashing shortens the critical path by adding resources to activities on it, directly compressing total duration. It satisfies the stem's requirement for a schedule compression technique, though it carries cost and risk trade-offs, and it pairs with fast tracking as the other recognised compression method.
- ✗
Adding buffers to the schedule
Why it's wrong here
Adding buffers to the schedule involves incorporating extra time, or contingency reserves, into the project timeline to account for uncertainties, risks, or unforeseen delays. While a prudent risk management practice, buffers are designed to absorb variations and protect the project's completion date, thereby extending the planned duration rather than shortening it. Consequently, this action directly counteracts any effort to compress the project schedule, making it an inappropriate response to significant schedule delays when compression is desired.
- ✗
Resource leveling: smoothing resource demand to avoid peaks
Why it's wrong here
Resource leveling is a schedule optimization technique used to adjust the project schedule to balance resource demand with available supply, particularly when resources are over-allocated or when a constant level of resource usage is desired. This process often involves delaying non-critical activities to smooth out resource peaks, which typically results in an extended project duration. Therefore, while beneficial for resource management and avoiding burnout, resource leveling is not a schedule compression technique and usually lengthens the project timeline.
- ✗
Reducing scope: removing non-critical deliverables
Why it's wrong here
Reducing scope involves formally removing non-critical deliverables or features from the project's agreed-upon requirements. While a reduction in scope might indirectly lead to a shorter schedule by eliminating associated work, it is fundamentally a scope management action that requires a formal change request and stakeholder approval. It is not classified as a direct schedule compression technique, which specifically focuses on accelerating existing work within the defined scope rather than altering the scope itself.
Visual reference
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
This PMP question is part of Courseiva's 820-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 PMP 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 PMP exam.