PMP Process: 263 practice questions

12 of the 263 Process questions in the Certsqill PMP bank, shown in full below. Each one carries an explanation for every option, not just the correct one — the wrong answers are where the marks go.

Preparing for PMP? Take the free 5-min readiness check →

1. Mitigate — an action that reduces the probability: Which risk response strategy is this?

1. Transfer — shifting the financial impact of the threat to a third party

   Transfer moves financial risk to another party (e.g., insurance or penalty clauses) — the escrow doesn't shift financial exposure, it reduces impact by preserving access to the code.
2. Avoid — eliminating the threat entirely by removing the underlying cause

   Avoiding the threat would mean switching vendors or removing the dependency altogether — the escrow keeps the same vendor relationship in place.
3. Mitigate — an action that reduces the probability or impact of the threat ✓

   A software escrow reduces the impact of vendor bankruptcy by ensuring the team can still access the source code. Mitigation reduces probability or impact without eliminating the risk.
4. Accept — acknowledging the threat but taking no proactive action against it

   Acceptance takes no action to reduce the threat — arranging a software escrow is a proactive mitigation action, so this is not acceptance.

Mitigation = reduce probability or impact. Escrow reduces impact (ensures code access if vendor fails) = mitigation. Transfer = financial shift (insurance). Avoid = eliminate the risk source.

2. Share — bring in a third party better positioned to help: Which opportunity response strategy is this?

1. Exploit — take direct action to remove uncertainty and ensure the opportunity is realized

   Exploit acts to guarantee the opportunity happens (e.g., assigning the best internal resources). Partnering with a vendor because the team lacks the skills is sharing, not exploiting.
2. Enhance — increase the probability or the positive impact of the opportunity

   Enhance raises an opportunity's likelihood or benefit without partnering, by adding focus or resources. Here the vendor is brought in to fill a skill gap, which is sharing.
3. Mitigate — reduce the negative impact of adopting the unfamiliar new technology

   Mitigate is a threat response that reduces negative impact. The team is responding to a positive opportunity, not a threat, so mitigate does not apply.
4. Share — bring in a third party better positioned to help capture the opportunity ✓

   Share involves partnering with a third party (the vendor) who has the capability to capture an opportunity the team cannot fully exploit alone — the benefit is shared between the project and the vendor.

Opportunity responses: Exploit (guarantee it), Share (partner with capable third party), Enhance (increase probability/impact), Accept. Partnering when your team lacks skills = Share.

3. -$30,000 — Risk A -$60K plus Risk B -$10K plus Opportunity: What is the total Expected Monetary Value (EMV) of

1. -$30,000 — Risk A -$60K plus Risk B -$10K plus Opportunity C +$40K ✓

   EMV = Probability × Impact. Risk A: 0.30 × -$200K = -$60K. Risk B: 0.20 × -$50K = -$10K. Opportunity C: 0.40 × +$100K = +$40K. Total EMV = -$60K + (-$10K) + $40K = -$30K.
2. -$70,000 — summing only the two threats and ignoring the opportunity

   EMV must include all events, threats and opportunities alike. Opportunity C contributes +$40K, giving a net EMV of -$30K, not -$70K.
3. +$40,000 — counting only Opportunity C and ignoring both threats

   EMV must include every risk and opportunity. Both threats must be added to the total, so the correct net EMV is -$30K, not +$40K.
4. -$350,000 — summing the raw impacts without weighting by probability

   EMV requires multiplying each impact by its probability — you cannot sum the full impact values without applying the probability weighting.

EMV = Σ(Probability × Impact). Threats are negative; opportunities are positive. Risk A: -$60K. Risk B: -$10K. Opportunity C: +$40K. Total = -$30K.

4. SPI = 0.80 and CPI = 0.89: What are the SPI and CPI, and what do they mean?

1. SPI = 0.89 (behind schedule), CPI = 0.80 (over budget)

   The formulas are reversed here. SPI = EV/PV (not EV/AC) and CPI = EV/AC (not EV/PV). Applying them correctly gives SPI = 160/200 = 0.80 and CPI = 160/180 = 0.89.
2. SPI = 0.80 (behind schedule) and CPI = 0.89 (over budget) ✓

   SPI = EV/PV = $160K/$200K = 0.80, so SPI < 1 means behind schedule. CPI = EV/AC = $160K/$180K = 0.89, so CPI < 1 means over budget. The project is both behind schedule and over budget.
3. SPI = 1.25 (ahead of schedule) and CPI = 0.89 (over budget)

   SPI = EV/PV = 160/200 = 0.80, not 1.25. Because PV > EV, more was planned than accomplished, so the project is behind schedule, not ahead.
4. SPI = 0.80 (behind schedule) and CPI = 1.12 (under budget)

   CPI = EV/AC = 160/180 = 0.89, not 1.12. Because actual cost exceeded earned value, CPI < 1 means the project is over budget, not under.

SPI = EV/PV = 160/200 = 0.80 (behind schedule). CPI = EV/AC = 160/180 = 0.89 (over budget). Both < 1 means the project needs corrective action.

5. $500,000: What is the Estimate at Completion (EAC)?

1. $425,000 (EAC = AC + remaining work budget)

   EAC = AC + BAC - EV applies when remaining work will be performed at the original budget rate — but the PM stated the inefficiency will continue, requiring the CPI-based formula.
2. $475,000 (EAC = AC + a new-estimate ETC)

   EAC = AC + ETC is used when a new estimate for remaining work is available — the question states using current CPI, so EAC = BAC/CPI applies.
3. $500,000 (EAC = BAC / CPI = 400K / 0.80) ✓

   CPI = EV/AC = 100/125 = 0.80. EAC = BAC/CPI = $400,000/0.80 = $500,000. This formula assumes the current cost performance will continue for remaining work.
4. $320,000 (EAC = EV × BAC / AC formula)

   This calculation is not a standard EAC formula. The correct CPI-based EAC is BAC/CPI = 400,000/0.80 = $500,000.

EAC = BAC/CPI when current performance trend continues. CPI = 100/125 = 0.80. EAC = 400,000/0.80 = $500,000.

6. Gold plating — the PM should remove the feature and route: What is this called, and what should the project ma

1. Scope creep — the PM should log it and handle it through the lessons-learned register at project close

   Scope creep is unauthorized expansion driven by stakeholder requests, whereas this expansion was initiated by the project team, which the exam classifies as gold plating — and it needs correction now, not just a lessons-learned note.
2. Value-added enhancement — the PM should keep the feature because it clearly improves the product for users

   Even beneficial additions must pass through change control. Accepting an unauthorized change sets a precedent that bypasses governance and undermines baseline management.
3. A technical risk — the PM should record it in the risk register and monitor the two-week schedule impact

   The schedule impact is a consequence of the gold plating, not the core issue — the primary problem is the unauthorized scope addition, which is a scope/change-control matter, not a risk to monitor.
4. Gold plating — the PM should remove the feature and route all changes through the change control process ✓

   Gold plating is adding unrequested features beyond approved scope, consuming resources without stakeholder approval. Regardless of good intentions, it bypasses change control and must be avoided.

Gold plating = team adds unrequested features beyond approved scope. Always avoided — even 'good' additions must go through change control to maintain baseline integrity.

7. Submit the change request to the Change Control Board: What must happen next before implementing the change?

1. Submit the change request to the Change Control Board (CCB) for its formal review and approval ✓

   Integrated change control requires all significant changes to go through the CCB for formal approval before implementation — even when the PM believes the change is feasible and beneficial.
2. Implement the change right away because the PM has already assessed it as feasible and beneficial

   The PM's feasibility assessment is an input to the change control process, not authorization to act — the CCB holds the approval authority to proceed.
3. Ask the stakeholder to resubmit the request during the next scheduled planning cycle instead

   There is no requirement to defer a legitimate change request to a future cycle — it should be processed promptly through change control rather than delayed.
4. Update the project management plan now to incorporate the newly requested feature addition

   The project management plan is updated only after the change is approved by the CCB — not before the approval decision is made.

Change control process: Submit request → PM assess impact → CCB reviews and approves/rejects → Implement if approved → Update baselines and PM plan.

8. Code reviews are QA: Which activities represent Quality Assurance and Quality Control respectively?

1. Test-case execution is QA (process-oriented); code review is QC (product-oriented)

   This is reversed. QA is process improvement (code reviews, audits) and QC is product inspection (testing, defect detection). Testing inspects the product output, so it is QC, not QA.
2. Code reviews are QA (process-oriented); test-case execution is QC (product-oriented) ✓

   QA focuses on the processes used to create the product — code reviews ensure the team follows standards, preventing defects. QC inspects the actual output — test-case execution finds defects in completed features.
3. Both are QC activities, since each one checks whether the agreed standards are being met

   Only test-case execution, which inspects the product, is QC. Code reviews evaluate the process and practices, which makes them QA — the two serve fundamentally different purposes.
4. Both are QA activities, since each one works to prevent defects from reaching customers

   Only code reviews, which are process-focused, are QA. Test-case execution finds defects in the product, which is QC — it can catch defects before customers see them, but it is still QC.

QA = process-oriented (audits, process reviews, standards adherence — prevent defects). QC = product-oriented (testing, inspection, defect detection — find defects).

9. Rework costs to fix defects found during customer: Which of the following is a Cost of Nonconformance?

1. Training developers on secure coding standards to prevent future defects

   This is a Cost of Conformance (prevention cost) — building developer capability proactively prevents defects rather than repairing failures, so it does not belong in the nonconformance category.
2. Purchasing automated testing tools to inspect builds before release

   This is a Cost of Conformance (appraisal cost) — inspection tooling spends money to find defects before delivery, an investment in quality, not a cost incurred because quality failed.
3. Rework costs to fix defects found during customer acceptance testing ✓

   Cost of Nonconformance = costs incurred because quality standards were NOT met. Rework to fix defects is a nonconformance cost — it arises from failure to build quality in the first place.
4. Conducting peer code reviews to catch issues early in development

   This is a Cost of Conformance (prevention cost) — reviews proactively catch issues during development, preventing defects rather than paying for failures that have already occurred.

Cost of Quality = Conformance (prevention + appraisal) + Nonconformance (internal failure + external failure). Rework = nonconformance (internal failure).

10. Critical path = A→D→E→F: What is the critical path, and what is the total float on Path 1?

1. Critical path = A→G→H (15 days); Float on Path 1 = 3 days

   The critical path must be the LONGEST path — 18 days (Path 2), not 15 days. Float on Path 1 = 18 - 12 = 6 days, not 3 days.
2. Critical path = A→B→C (12 days); Float on Path 1 = 0 days

   The critical path is the longest path, not the shortest. Path 2 at 18 days is the critical path, so Path 1 (12 days) has 6 days of float, not zero.
3. Critical path = A→D→E→F (18 days); Float on Path 1 = 3 days

   The critical path is correct (18 days), but float on Path 1 = 18 - 12 = 6 days, not 3 days — the subtraction of the two path durations was done incorrectly.
4. Critical path = A→D→E→F (18 days); Float on Path 1 = 6 days ✓

   The critical path is the longest path through the network — A→D→E→F at 18 days. Total float on Path 1 = 18 - 12 = 6 days (how much Path 1 can be delayed without delaying the project).

Critical path = longest path (A→D→E→F = 18 days). Float = critical path duration - path duration = 18 - 12 = 6 days for Path 1.

11. Adding developers = crashing: Which options represent crashing and fast-tracking respectively?

1. Adding developers = crashing; overlapping phases = fast-tracking ✓

   Crashing adds resources (cost) to accelerate critical path activities. Fast-tracking overlaps activities that were planned sequentially — it accelerates the schedule but increases risk (rework if sequential dependencies existed for good reason).
2. Adding developers = fast-tracking; overlapping phases = crashing

   This reverses the definitions. Fast-tracking runs activities in parallel; crashing adds resources to shorten duration. Adding developers is crashing, and overlapping development with testing is fast-tracking.
3. Both are crashing — both add resources to compress the schedule

   Only adding developers is crashing. Overlapping development and testing uses the existing resources but changes the activity sequence — that is fast-tracking, so the two options are not both crashing.
4. Both are fast-tracking — both involve doing more work simultaneously

   Only overlapping the phases is fast-tracking. Adding resources to a single activity is crashing — it compresses duration by adding capacity, not by parallelizing work, so the two are not both fast-tracking.

Crashing = add resources to shorten critical path activities (increases cost). Fast-tracking = parallelize sequential activities (increases risk). Both compress the schedule.

12. Firm Fixed Price: Which contract type should the buyer select?

1. Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) — all costs plus fee

   CPFF reimburses all of the seller's costs plus a fixed fee — the buyer, not the seller, bears the full cost-overrun risk, which is the opposite of transferring risk to the seller.
2. Firm Fixed Price (FFP) — one fixed total price ✓

   FFP sets a fixed total price regardless of actual costs — the seller bears all cost overrun risk. With well-defined requirements, this is safe for the buyer and transfers maximum cost risk to the seller.
3. Time and Material (T&M) — hourly, no ceiling

   T&M pays for actual hours and materials with no cost ceiling, so the final price is open-ended — the buyer carries the cost risk, making it unsuitable for transferring maximum risk to the seller.
4. Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF) — shared savings

   CPIF shares cost overruns and underruns between buyer and seller through a share ratio — cost risk is split rather than fully transferred, so it does not maximize risk transfer to the seller.

FFP = maximum cost risk on seller (buyer wins if seller is efficient). CPFF/CPIF = cost risk on buyer. T&M = undefined cost risk on buyer. Use FFP with well-defined requirements.

Other PMP domains

• People — 181 questions →
• Business Environment — 55 questions →
• All 499 PMP questions →