PMP People — Leading Projects Practice Question
Your project is running 15% over budget at the midpoint. The sponsor asks you to reduce costs by cutting team training. Which TWO actions should you take?
⚠ Common exam trap
It's easy for candidates to assume the sponsor's request must be followed without question (Option B), failing to recognize the project manager's duty to advocate for necessary resources and negotiate trade-offs based on risk 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
✓
Analyze the budget to identify other areas where costs can be reduced without impacting quality
It aligns with the project manager's responsibility to optimize the budget without compromising quality. By analyzing the budget, you can identify non-critical areas for cost reduction, such as administrative overhead or non-essential resources, while preserving team training which directly impacts long-term performance and quality. This approach demonstrates proactive cost management and stakeholder negotiation, key aspects of the 'People' domain in leading projects.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✓
Analyze the budget to identify other areas where costs can be reduced without impacting quality
Why this is correct
Before seeking external solutions or impacting scope/quality, a project manager's primary responsibility is to investigate the root cause of budget overruns and identify internal efficiencies. This involves detailed analysis of actual costs versus planned, identifying variances, and exploring options for cost optimization or re-prioritization of expenditures without compromising critical project deliverables or quality standards. This demonstrates proactive cost management and problem-solving.
- ✗
Accept the sponsor's request and cancel all upcoming training
Why it's wrong here
Blindly accepting a sponsor's request to cut training, especially without assessing its impact, is a reactive and potentially detrimental approach. Training is often crucial for developing team capabilities, ensuring quality, mitigating future risks, and achieving project objectives. Eliminating it without a thorough impact analysis could lead to decreased productivity, increased errors, and long-term negative consequences for the project and the organization, making it an irresponsible decision.
- ✗
Submit a change request to increase the budget
Why it's wrong here
Submitting a change request to increase the budget as a first response to an overrun bypasses the project manager's responsibility to actively manage and control costs. Before escalating to formal change control, the project manager should exhaust all internal options for cost reduction, re-forecasting, or re-prioritization within the existing budget constraints. A change request for additional funds should only be pursued after demonstrating that all other avenues have been explored and are insufficient, providing a robust justification to the Change Control Board.
- ✗
Reduce the project scope to meet the budget
Why it's wrong here
Reducing project scope is a significant decision that directly impacts project deliverables and stakeholder expectations, requiring formal change control procedures. It should not be the initial or unilateral response to a budget overrun. Before considering scope reduction, which can diminish the project's value proposition, the project manager must first explore internal cost-saving measures and alternative solutions to maintain the agreed-upon scope while addressing the budget challenge.
- ✓
Explain to the sponsor the benefits of training and the risks of cutting it
Why this is correct
Proactively communicating with the sponsor is essential for effective stakeholder management. Instead of simply complying or refusing, the project manager should provide a data-driven explanation of how training contributes to project success, quality, and risk mitigation. This educates the sponsor on the potential adverse impacts of cutting training, enabling them to make an informed decision based on a comprehensive understanding of the trade-offs and consequences.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
Courseiva writes every PMP question from scratch — 800 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 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.