Free PMP practice questions

A common vision is a brief, shared statement of the intended outcome and value of the work. It is the reference point for decisions, not a plan or a scope document.

The statement is short and outcome-focused, and it was agreed with the sponsor and users. That is what a vision is for: giving everyone the same answer to 'why are we doing this?' so trade-offs point the same way. It does not replace the backlog, freeze scope or capture individual requirements.

1. Notice the statement is one paragraph about an outcome, not a list of work.
2. Notice it was agreed jointly by sponsor and users.
3. Match 'shared outcome that guides choices' to the purpose of a vision.
4. Rule out options that describe scope, requirements or backlog artifacts.

Exam tip: The vision answers 'why' and guides decisions; the backlog and scope answer 'what'.

Before recommending a development approach, the project manager assesses the project's needs, complexity and magnitude, especially how uncertain the requirements and the technology are.

Two facts in the stem matter: stakeholders disagree about features (requirements uncertainty) and the platform is new (technical uncertainty). PMI expects the project manager to understand the situation before acting, so assessing these factors comes first. A WBS presumes stable scope, a default framework skips tailoring, and passing the choice back ignores the request for a recommendation.

1. Spot the signals: disputed features and an unfamiliar platform.
2. Recognise both as uncertainty factors that drive the choice of approach.
3. Apply 'assess before acting': analyse before recommending.
4. Reject options that presume an approach or hand the decision away.

Exam tip: Assess requirements and technical uncertainty first; the approach recommendation follows from it.

Project governance is the framework of structure, rules, decision rights and oversight within which the project is managed.

The document allocates authority (who approves budget changes), sets oversight (steering committee review cadence) and limits the project manager's discretion. Those three elements define governance. The management plan and communications plan are tempting because they also contain procedures, but they describe how the project team works and communicates, not who decides.

1. Look at what the document controls: authority, oversight and decision rights.
2. Ask whether it tells the team how to do the work or who may decide.
3. Decision rights and oversight above the project manager are governance.
4. Plans for executing or communicating the work sit inside that framework.

Exam tip: Governance decides who decides; the management plan decides how the work gets done.

In predictive projects the project charter is the document that authorizes the project and captures its purpose, objectives and success criteria: the formal expression of the project vision.

The sponsor asks for three things together (purpose, measurable objectives, success criteria) plus formal authorization. Only the charter does all of these. The scope statement is the tempting choice because it is also an early document, but it details deliverables and does not authorize the project.

1. Identify what must be recorded: purpose, objectives, success criteria.
2. Identify the extra requirement: formal authorization.
3. Recall that the charter authorizes the project and holds its high-level purpose.
4. Rule out documents that elaborate scope, people or traceability.

Exam tip: Predictive projects anchor their vision in the charter: purpose, objectives, success criteria and authorization.

Magnitude (size, number of sites, budget) and complexity (uncertainty in requirements and technology) are separate assessments. The approach follows uncertainty, not size.

Project A is big but routine: a fixed, proven configuration repeated many times, which suits a detailed predictive plan. Project B is small but its users cannot describe their needs, the classic case for short adaptive iterations. Reversing the two is the trap for anyone who equates 'large' with 'complex'; adding contingency reserve to B treats unknown requirements as a risk to be funded rather than discovered; iterating on A spends adaptive overhead on work with little uncertainty.

1. Rate each project's magnitude: A large, B small.
2. Rate each project's uncertainty: A low, B high.
3. Recall that the approach follows uncertainty, not size.
4. Choose predictive for the low-uncertainty project and adaptive for the high-uncertainty one.

Exam tip: Big is not the same as complex: choose the approach from uncertainty, then scale the plan to the magnitude.