PMP Exam Dumps - Project Management Professional (2025 Version)

When a project manager encounters a potential change in the project environment, such as a new law that may affect the project, the first two actions they should perform are to identify the risks and consult the stakeholders. Risk identification is the process of determining the risks that may affect the project and documenting their characteristics. It is an iterative process that should be performed throughout the project life cycle, especially when there are changes or uncertainties. Consulting the stakeholders is also important, as they may have valuable insights, opinions, or expectations regarding the potential impacts of the new law on the project. The project manager should communicate with the stakeholders and seek their feedback and support. Creating a change request, requesting additional budget, or discussing with SMEs are not the first actions to perform, as they require more analysis and evaluation of the situation. A change request should be submitted only after the project manager has assessed the impact of the change and determined the best course of action. Requesting additional budget should be based on a realistic estimate of the cost implications of the change, not on a contingency. Discussing with SMEs may be helpful, but it is not as essential as involving the project team and the stakeholders, who have more direct interest and influence on the project. References:

A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) – Sixth Edition, Chapter 11, Section 11.2

Practice Standard for Project Risk Management, Chapter 3, Section 3.1

The Standard for Project Management, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.2

In an agile project, the project manager does not assign tasks to the team members, but rather facilitates the team’s self-organization and empowerment. The team decides how to plan, execute, monitor, and control the work within the sprint, based on the agreed-upon requirements and priorities. The project manager supports the team by removing impediments, providing feedback, and ensuring alignment with the project vision and goals. The daily standup is a short meeting where the team members share their progress, challenges, and plans for the next 24 hours, not a place where the project manager instructs the team what to do. References:

Agile Practice Guide, page 37

PMBOK Guide 7th Edition, page 97

 The project manager should request an architecture review as the first step to address the design flaw that may potentially impact the final quality. An architecture review is a process of evaluating the design of a system or a product against a set of criteria, such as requirements, standards, best practices, and quality attributes. An architecture review can help to identify and resolve design issues, risks, and gaps, as well as to ensure alignment with the project objectives and stakeholder expectations. By requesting an architecture review, the project manager can involve the relevant experts, such as the new architect, the previous architect (if possible), the quality assurance team, and the customer, to assess the impact of the design flaw and to propose and agree on the necessary changes. This will also help to update the project scope, schedule, cost, and quality baselines accordingly. References:

Architecture Reviews - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

Architecture Review Process - SEBoK

Architecture Review - The Open Group

Design Flaw Attacks - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

DESIGN FLAWS: FLAWS BY DESIGN? / The Design Society

 In situations of conflict, it is important for the project manager to address the issue constructively. Cultivating self-awareness through emotional intelligence (EI) can help team members understand their own emotions and those of others, which is crucial in resolving conflicts. This approach aligns with the PMBOK guide’s recommendations on conflict management, which suggest that problem-solving and collaboration are effective strategies for dealing with team conflicts12. By fostering EI, the project manager can facilitate a more harmonious work environment and mitigate the negative impact on the project. References: = PMI’s resources on conflict management and resolution strategies1; PMBOK Guide’s section on conflict resolution2.

According to the PMBOK Guide, 7th edition, one of the key activities of the project manager is to engage stakeholders and manage their expectations throughout the project. This includes discussing the options with the client as part of the change control process, which is a formal and documented procedure that defines how changes to the project scope, schedule, cost, quality, or any other aspect of the project will be requested, evaluated, approved, rejected, or implemented. In this scenario, the client’s request to use a new workaround instead of the approved contingency plan is a change request that may affect the project objectives and outcomes. Therefore, the project manager should discuss the options with the client as part of the change control process, and evaluate the impact, feasibility, and benefits of the proposed workaround, as well as the implications of not following the contingency plan. Option D is the best answer for this question.

Option A is not the best answer because requesting to use the management reserve to keep the schedule is not the next thing that the project manager should do. It is a possible action that the project manager may take if the change request is approved and the project budget is insufficient to cover the additional costs of the workaround, but it is not a necessary or immediate action. Moreover, requesting to use the management reserve may not always be feasible or desirable, as it may increase the project costs and risks, and may require the approval of senior management or the project sponsor.

Option B is not the best answer because mitigating risks associated with the workaround to avoid project delays is not the next thing that the project manager should do. It is a possible action that the project manager may take if the change request is approved and the workaround introduces new or increased risks to the project, but it is not a proactive or effective action to resolve the current issue. Moreover, mitigating risks may not always be possible or sufficient, as some risks may be unavoidable or unpredictable, and may require other risk response strategies, such as avoidance, transfer, or acceptance.

Option C is not the best answer because proceeding with the approved risk response plan is not the next thing that the project manager should do. It is a possible action that the project manager may take if the change request is rejected and the contingency plan is still valid and applicable, but it is not a respectful or collaborative action to deal with the client’s request. Moreover, proceeding with the approved risk response plan may not always be appropriate or acceptable, as the client may have valid reasons or new information to suggest a different workaround, and may escalate the issue or withdraw their support if their request is ignored or dismissed. References: PMBOK Guide, 7th edition, pages 9-10, 15-16, 25-26, 35-36, 49-50, 59-60, 69-70.

According to the Professional in Business Analysis (PMI-PBA)® Guide, a change request is a formal proposal to modify any document, deliverable, or baseline. A change request should include a clear description of the change, the rationale for the change, the impact of the change on the project, and the alternatives considered. A change request should also be evaluated for its feasibility, benefits, risks, and alignment with the project objectives and scope. In this scenario, the project manager should have assessed the change’s overall impact to the project before submitting it to the CCB. This would have helped the project manager to determine if the change was necessary, beneficial, and feasible, and to communicate the pros and cons of the change to the SME and the CCB. This would have also helped the project manager to avoid or mitigate any potential conflicts or resistance from the SME or the CCB. Requesting that the sponsor approved the change request first, ensuring that the change request was aligned with the project scope, or submitting the change request directly to the CCB are actions that should be taken after the change’s impact assessment, not before. These actions do not address the root cause of the situation, which is the lack of a proper impact analysis of the change request. References: (Professional in Business Analysis Reference Materials source and documents)

Professional in Business Analysis (PMI-PBA)® Guide, Chapter 6, Section 6.4.1.1

A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) – Seventh Edition, Chapter 8, Section 8.2.2.1

 The project manager should take two actions to address the feedback from the security department about regulations that the project must comply with. The first action is to ask the team members to analyze the impact of including this regulation on the project scope, schedule, cost, quality, and risk. This will help the project manager to understand the implications and trade-offs of incorporating the regulation, and to plan accordingly. The second action is to ask the product owner to include the requirements in the product backlog, and prioritize them based on their value and urgency. This will ensure that the regulation is properly documented and communicated to the team and stakeholders, and that it is aligned with the project vision and goals. The project manager should also collaborate with the product owner and the team to determine the best way to deliver the regulation in the upcoming iterations, and to monitor and control its implementation and verification.

Option B is not a good choice, because it is not the project manager’s responsibility to ask the stakeholders about the priority of the regulation. The project manager should defer to the product owner, who is the primary person responsible for managing the product backlog and prioritizing the requirements. The project manager should support the product owner in engaging the stakeholders and obtaining their feedback and approval, but not make the decision on their behalf.

Option D is not a good choice, because it is not a proactive or timely action. The project manager should not wait until the feedback is received to ask the security department for details about the regulations. The project manager should have identified and engaged the security department as a key stakeholder early in the project, and obtained their input and expectations regarding the regulations. The project manager should also have established a regular and effective communication channel with the security department, and ensured that they are involved and informed throughout the project lifecycle.

Option E is not a good choice, because it is not a realistic or feasible action. The project manager should not ask the team members to include the requirements in the next iteration, without considering the impact, priority, and complexity of the regulation. The project manager should respect the team’s autonomy and capacity, and avoid imposing unrealistic or arbitrary deadlines. The project manager should also follow the agile principles and practices, and allow the team to self-organize and plan their work based on the product backlog and the iteration goals.

 1: Project Management Professional (PMP)® Certification 2: A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) – Seventh Edition

A minimum viable product (MVP) is a version of a product that has enough features to satisfy early customers and provide feedback for future development12. An MVP is a common strategy in agile project management, where the project team delivers working functionality in short iterations or sprints, and continuously improves the product based on customer feedback and changing requirements34.

Identifying the minimum functionality required for the product can help the project manager meet the management’s expectation of delivering a product prototype that can be presented to potential customers in the first iteration. By focusing on the core features that provide the most value to the customers, the project manager can reduce the scope, cost, and time of the project, and increase the quality and satisfaction of the product5 .

Identifying the minimum functionality required for the product also involves collaborating with the project sponsor, the marketing team, and the customers to understand their needs, preferences, and expectations. The project manager should use various techniques, such as interviews, surveys, focus groups, prototyping, and testing, to gather and validate the requirements and feedback of the stakeholders .

Identifying the minimum functionality required for the product is not the same as splitting the backlog into phases, increasing the details of the WBS, or asking the sponsor to prioritize some functionalities. These are all possible actions that the project manager can take after identifying the MVP, but they are not the first step in ensuring that the deliverable of the first iteration helps the marketing team present the product prototype to potential customers.