New Year Sale 2026! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

PMI-RMP Exam - Topic 7 Question 83 Discussion

Actual exam question for PMI's PMI-RMP exam
Question #: 83
Topic #: 7
[All PMI-RMP Questions]

After presenting a list of risks to the major project stakeholders and project sponsor, the board requested the risks be sorted differently from the results presented by the project team. This is a major issue and will cause a 2-week delay in the project.

How could the risk manager have avoided the board's response?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: A

by Stephane at Jul 16, 2024, 04:08 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium PMI-RMP Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Candida
3 months ago
Definitely needed to involve the board earlier in the process.
upvoted 0 times
...
Myrtie
3 months ago
Not sure an industry standard would have helped here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Eladia
3 months ago
Surprised they didn't consult the sponsor first!
upvoted 0 times
...
Rebbeca
4 months ago
I think prioritizing by the sponsor's appetite makes more sense.
upvoted 0 times
...
Evangelina
4 months ago
Engaging stakeholders early is key!
upvoted 0 times
...
Clarinda
4 months ago
I vaguely remember a practice question about using industry standards for risk prioritization. Option D might be useful, but I’m not confident it would address the board's specific concerns directly.
upvoted 0 times
...
Beckie
4 months ago
Engaging with the project sponsor before the board presentation sounds like a solid strategy. I feel like that could have clarified their preferences, but I can't recall if we discussed this specific scenario.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ryan
4 months ago
I think prioritizing based on the project sponsor's risk appetite could have helped. It makes sense to align with their expectations, but I wonder if that alone would have been enough.
upvoted 0 times
...
Pamella
5 months ago
I remember we talked about the importance of stakeholder engagement in risk management. Option A seems like a good choice, but I'm not entirely sure if it would have completely avoided the issue.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kristel
5 months ago
Ah, I see. Prioritizing based on the sponsor's risk appetite makes a lot of sense. That way, you're tailoring the risk assessment to their specific needs and concerns. I'll keep that in mind.
upvoted 0 times
...
Shantay
5 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit unsure here. Engaging the sponsor early on seems like a good strategy, but I'm not sure if that would have completely avoided the board's response. Maybe a combination of approaches would work best.
upvoted 0 times
...
Antione
5 months ago
This seems like a tricky situation. I'd want to carefully review the stakeholder engagement process and see if there were any gaps or opportunities to better align with their priorities.
upvoted 0 times
...
Yasuko
5 months ago
Ah, using an established industry standard prioritization method - that's a smart move. That way, you can demonstrate a well-tested, objective approach that the board is likely to trust.
upvoted 0 times
...
Edwin
5 months ago
Hmm, this seems like a tricky one. I'll need to think through the implications of the perpetual cost method and how that would affect the WIP clearing run.
upvoted 0 times
...
Amalia
5 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit unsure on this one. I know sympathy strikes are when workers strike in support of another group, but I can't recall the specific term for employees who don't cross the picket line. Let me think this through...
upvoted 0 times
...
Markus
10 months ago
Honestly, I'm just happy I'm not the one dealing with this project. Prioritizing risks sounds about as fun as herding cats while juggling chainsaws. But hey, at least the board's request is only a 2-week delay - could be worse, am I right?
upvoted 0 times
Erick
10 months ago
C) Engaging with the project sponsor before presenting to the board
upvoted 0 times
...
Jamika
10 months ago
A) Engaging the key stakeholders during the prioritization process
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Yolando
10 months ago
Ah, the joys of project management. I'd go with C too. Engaging the sponsor beforehand is like putting on your seatbelt before a road trip - it's just common sense.
upvoted 0 times
...
Georgeanna
10 months ago
Hmm, I'd have to go with D. Working with an established industry standard prioritization method seems like a safer bet than pleasing the sponsor. But hey, what do I know? I'm just here to pass the exam, not run the project!
upvoted 0 times
...
Viola
11 months ago
I totally agree with Erin. Presenting to the board without the sponsor's input is just asking for trouble. C is the way to go.
upvoted 0 times
Arlette
10 months ago
Working with an established industry standard prioritization method could also help.
upvoted 0 times
...
Justine
10 months ago
Agree, it would have avoided the delay if they had done that.
upvoted 0 times
...
Irving
10 months ago
Definitely, it's important to align with the sponsor's expectations.
upvoted 0 times
...
Jules
10 months ago
I think engaging with the project sponsor before presenting to the board is crucial.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Clare
11 months ago
Working with an established industry standard prioritization method might have also helped in avoiding the board's response.
upvoted 0 times
...
Erin
11 months ago
The correct answer is C, engaging with the project sponsor before presenting to the board. That's a classic move to avoid surprises and ensure alignment.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lonna
11 months ago
I agree with Lelia. Prioritizing the risks based on the project sponsor's risk appetite could have avoided this issue.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lelia
11 months ago
The risk manager should have engaged with the project sponsor before presenting to the board.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel