Exam PMP topic 1 question 304 discussion

This is D

D. Analyzed stakeholders This option is the most appropriate because: Stakeholder Engagement: By analyzing stakeholders, the project manager would have identified the key stakeholders, understood their interests, concerns, and levels of influence, and addressed any potential objections or questions before they became an issue. Proactive Communication: Effective stakeholder analysis allows the project manager to communicate the project's value and benefits in a way that aligns with stakeholders' interests and priorities, thereby reducing the likelihood of opposition.

The project manager should have D. Analyzed stakeholders. Stakeholder analysis is a crucial part of project planning that helps identify all parties affected by the project and understand their interests, influence, and attitudes towards the project. This understanding can help the project manager address concerns proactively, communicate effectively, and ensure that all stakeholders understand the project’s value, thereby avoiding such setbacks.

Its not B because you can have a perfect assessment but someone with higher power might still question it and block it if they have never been properly engaged before. Its D, because you need the buy-in from the stakeholders.

D. Analyzed stakeholders

I chose B because assessing if the project is possible and evaluating if it would actually achieve the goal of reducing production costs and placing that in the cost benefit management plan, would allow the stakeholder to see the value of the project and not have to speculate on its value. The Cost benefit management plan is an input in the develop charter process, therefore if that was done effectively the stakeholder would have been satisfied.

D. Analyzed stakeholders To avoid setbacks related to project approval and stakeholder concerns, it's important to analyze stakeholders as part of project initiation. By identifying key stakeholders, understanding their interests, concerns, and expectations, and engaging with them early in the project, the project manager can build support and address any issues or concerns they may have. This proactive approach helps ensure smoother project approval and execution. While benchmarking, assessing feasibility and impacts, and detailing the project charter are important steps in project planning and initiation, analyzing stakeholders is particularly relevant to addressing stakeholder concerns and gaining their approval.

Answer should be B in my opinion. Its the initiating phase of the project and the project charter should capture all business values and associated impacts and then identify all the stakeholders and share the information to them and take approval to start the project. Analyzing stakeholders means creating stakeholder engagement plan which is to happen after the project has been successfully initiated and approved to start.

D. Analyzed stakeholders

I'm going with D as well. Analyze stakeholders is not only for engaging them but also to understand their priorities, their expectations and to get their support and buy-in.

as per the question, one of the stakeholder is not conveinced about the project's value. Having conducted a stakeholder analysis, would have prevented this. On the other hand, if the PM had assessed the business documentation including feasibility study and impact analysis, he could have helped the sponsor to articulate the value better

Since the stakeholder is concerned about the value of the project, a detailed cost-benefit analysis could have improved the situation and if the feasibility was assessed properly, the questions would have been answered in the charter. Since it is in the initiation phase, the stakeholder identification is being done, and not the analysis which is performed during the planning phase.

D. This proactive approach would have allowed the project manager to anticipate the concerns of the key stakeholder and address them appropriately, potentially avoiding the delay in project charter approval.

i think the answer should be B, assess the feasibility and impact. The business case documented the feasibility and impact for the manager to consider whether we should go or not go for a project. If this part is not properly done, the manager may not authorised the project or delay the approval. Therefore, the answer should be B

The project manager should have analyzed stakeholders to avoid the setback caused by the questioning of the project's value by a key stakeholder during the approval of the project charter. By analyzing stakeholders, the project manager would have identified the stakeholders and their potential impact on the project. This would have enabled the project manager to understand the needs, expectations, and concerns of the stakeholders, including the key stakeholder, and address them accordingly in the project charter. This would have ensured that the project charter was detailed, feasible, and with fewer chances of stakeholders questioning the project's value.

A is not a right answer because there is no discussion about Product Standard D is right one

I feel A make more sense? any thoughts??