PMI-RMP Exam Dumps - PMI Risk Management Professional (PMI-RMP) Exam

To address the lack of risk management buy-in from the project team, the risk manager should organize risk engagement activities, such as workshops. These activities can help create awareness of the importance of risk management and motivate the team to take their risk management responsibilities seriously.

 Risk engagement is the process of involving stakeholders in risk management activities, such as identifying, analyzing, prioritizing, and responding to risks. Risk engagement activities are designed to motivate and influence the project team and other stakeholders to take their risk management responsibilities seriously and to understand the benefits of risk management for the project’s success. Risk engagement activities can include workshops, games, simulations, brainstorming sessions, surveys, interviews, and other interactive methods. Risk engagement activities can help to create a positive risk culture, improve communication and collaboration, increase risk awareness and ownership, and enhance risk management skills and knowledge. References: PMI Risk Management Professional (PMI-RMP) Examination Content Outline and Specifications1, page 9; Mastering PMI-RMP Domains, Tasks, and Enablers for Effective Risk2

The project manager should assess and record associated secondary risks and proceed to treat them as any other risks. This involves identifying and evaluating the potential negative health effects of using pesticides and developing a plan to mitigate these risks. While it is important to consider the concerns of residents, the health authorities have determined that not moving forward with the plan will have more serious consequences on public health.

 Secondary risks are those that arise as a direct outcome of implementing a risk response. In this case, the use of pesticides is a risk response to limit the risks of harmful insects, but it may also cause negative health effects to some residents. This is a secondary risk that needs to be assessed and recorded in the risk register, along with its probability, impact, and response plan. The project manager should not suspend the project, as this would ignore the primary risk of harmful insects. The project manager should not consult with health experts to provide a risk trigger, as this is not a valid risk management technique. A risk trigger is an indication that a risk event is about to occur or has occurred, not a condition that prevents a risk response from being implemented. The project manager should not proceed with the project as normal, as this would neglect the secondary risk and its potential consequences. The project manager should follow the risk management process and treat the secondary risk as any other risk in the project. References: PMI. (2017). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) – Sixth Edition. Chapter 11: Project Risk Management, p. 408. 5

According to the PMBOK® Guide, a scope change request is a formal proposal to modify any project document, deliverable, or baseline. It is an output of the Perform Integrated Change Control process, which is the process of reviewing all change requests, approving changes, and managing changes to the deliverables, organizational process assets, project documents, and the project management plan. A scope change request may introduce new risks or affect existing risks on the project, which may impact the project objectives, such as scope, schedule, cost, and quality.

The risk manager should support the project manager with the scope change request by evaluating any new risks that are introduced due to the change in scope. This is because the risk manager is responsible for planning, implementing, and monitoring the risk management activities on the project, as well as communicating and reporting the risk information to the project manager and other stakeholders. The risk manager should use the appropriate risk identification and analysis techniques, such as brainstorming, interviews, checklists, SWOT analysis, cause and effect diagrams, probability and impact assessment, etc., to identify and evaluate the new risks that may arise from the scope change. The risk manager should also document the new risks in the risk register, which is a project document that contains the details of all identified individual project risks and other relevant information.

The other options are not valid for what the risk manager should do to support the project manager with the scope change request:

• Update the risk management plan to reflect the scope change: This is not a valid option because the risk management plan is a component of the project management plan, which describes how risk management activities will be structured and performed on the project. It is an output of the Plan Risk Management process, which is the process of defining how to conduct risk management activities for a project. The risk management plan should not be updated to reflect the scope change, but rather to reflect any changes in the risk management approach, methodology, roles and responsibilities, budget, timing, risk categories, definitions, reporting formats, etc. The risk management plan should be updated only when there is a change in the risk management process, not in the project scope.
• Reassess the identified risks that impact the project scope: This is not a valid option because reassessing the identified risks that impact the project scope is part of the Monitor Risks process, which is the process of implementing risk response plans, tracking identified risks, monitoring residual risks, identifying new risks, and evaluating risk process effectiveness throughout the project. The risk manager should not reassess the identified risks that impact the project scope before evaluating any new risks that are introduced due to the change in scope. The risk manager should first identify and analyze the new risks, and then reassess the existing risks to determine if they are still valid, relevant, and prioritized.
• Update the risk register to identify, analyze, and plan a response for any new risk: This is not a valid option because updating the risk register to identify, analyze, and plan a response for any new risk is a combination of several risk management processes, such as Identify Risks, Perform Qualitative Risk Analysis, Perform Quantitative Risk Analysis, and Plan Risk Responses. The risk manager should not update the risk register to identify, analyze, and plan a response for any new risk in one step, but rather follow the sequential and iterative risk management processes to ensure a comprehensive and consistent risk management approach. The risk manager should also coordinate and communicate with the project manager and other stakeholders when updating the risk register, as well as obtain their approval and input.

References: PMBOK® Guide1, Risk Management Professional (PMI-RMP)® Cert Guide1

According to the PMI Risk Management Professional (PMI-RMP)® Examination Content Outline1, one of the tasks in the domain of Risk Identification is to review the stakeholder register and stakeholder engagement plan to communicate and solicit stakeholder input on risks throughout the project life cycle1. The stakeholder register is a project document that identifies the project stakeholders, their roles, interests, expectations, influence, and communication requirements2. The stakeholder engagement plan is a component of the project management plan that describes the strategies and actions to promote productive involvement of stakeholders in project decision making and execution3. In this scenario, the risk manager should review these documents to address the concerns of some stakeholders who are complaining that their opinions were not considered in the risk identification process. The risk manager should communicate with the stakeholders according to their preferences and needs, and solicit their input on the project risks using various tools and techniques, such as interviews, surveys, brainstorming, etc. The risk manager should also update the stakeholder register and stakeholder engagement plan as needed to reflect any changes in the stakeholder community or their expectations. The risk manager should not refer to the requirements documentation to confirm stakeholder requirements as they relate to risks, because that is not a direct way to address the stakeholders’ concerns, and it may not capture all the potential risks that the stakeholders may identify4. The risk manager should not refer to the project charter to find guidelines and stakeholder communication channels, because the project charter is a high-level document that does not provide detailed information on how to communicate and engage with the stakeholders5. The risk manager should not rewrite the risk register to include the additional possible risks and inform the stakeholders, because that is a premature and presumptuous action that may not reflect the actual views and inputs of the stakeholders, and it may create more confusion and dissatisfaction among them6. References: 1: PMI Risk Management Professional (PMI-RMP)® Examination Content Outline, page 82: A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) – Sixth Edition, page 5133: A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) – Sixth Edition, page 5184: A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) – Sixth Edition, page 1525: A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) – Sixth Edition, page 776: A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) – Sixth Edition, page 414.

An Ishikawa diagram (also known as a fishbone or cause-and-effect diagram) is a tool used to identify and analyze the root causes and sources of a risk. It helps the risk manager gain a deeper understanding of the risk source and likelihood. (Reference: PMBOK Guide, 6th Edition, p. 139)

 An Ishikawa diagram, also known as a fishbone diagram or a cause-and-effect diagram, is a tool that can help the risk manager to analyze the root causes of a risk and to identify the factors that influence its occurrence and impact. An Ishikawa diagram can also help to visualize the relationships among different causes and to prioritize the most significant ones. By developing and employing an Ishikawa diagram, the risk manager can gain a deeper understanding of the source and likelihood of the risk and plan appropriate responses accordingly. References: The Standard for Risk Management in Portfolios, Programs, and Projects, page 72; PMBOK Guide, 6th edition, page 398.

The project manager should first gather more information about the previous project's issues by interviewing the other project manager. This will help in understanding the root causes of the delay and how to prevent similar issues in the current project before taking further action.

 The project manager should first include the risk of delay in delivery of the GTG in the risk register and communicate with the stakeholders about the potential impact and response strategies. This is part of the risk identification process, which is the first step in risk management. The risk register is a document that records the identified risks, their causes, effects, probabilities, impacts, and response plans. The project manager should communicate with the stakeholders to ensure that they are aware of the risk and its implications, and to obtain their feedback and support. The project manager should also update the risk register as new information becomes available or as the risk status changes. The other options are not the first actions that the project manager should take. Communicating with the client to provide the previous shutdown plan is part of the risk response process, which comes after the risk identification and analysis processes. Reviewing and updating the project schedule is part of the schedule management process, which is not directly related to risk management. Interviewing the other project manager to learn more details is a technique that can be used to identify risks, but it is not the first action that the project manager should take. The project manager should first document the risk in the risk register and communicate with the stakeholders before seeking more information from other sources. References: 3, 4, 5

The project risk manager should monitor risk thresholds closely, as they represent the organization's risk appetite. In a project with a low risk appetite, it is essential to ensure that risks are managed within the defined thresholds to address stakeholders' concerns and maintain their confidence in the project's success.

According to the PMI Risk Management Professional (PMI-RMP) Reference Materials, risk thresholds are the measure of acceptable variation around an objective that reflects the risk appetite of the organization1. Risk appetite is the degree of uncertainty an entity is willing to take on in anticipation of a reward2. In this case, the project has a significant impact on the organization and the stakeholders have a low risk appetite, meaning they are not willing to accept much deviation from the project objectives. Therefore, the project risk manager should monitor the risk thresholds closely to ensure that the project risks do not exceed the acceptable level of variation and impact the project performance negatively. By monitoring the risk thresholds, the project risk manager can also identify when risk responses are needed and evaluate their effectiveness.

References: 1: PMI, Practice Standard for Project Risk Management, 2009, p. 20 2: PMI, A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide), Sixth Edition, 2017, p. 720

This is a secondary risk because it is a risk that arises as a direct result of implementing a risk response (in this case, procuring material from a different supplier).

A secondary risk is a risk that arises as a direct result of implementing a risk response to a specific risk. In this case, the risk response is to procure the material from a different supplier if the first supplier fails to deliver on time. The secondary risk is that there may be differences in the material provided by the first and second supplier, which could affect the quality, cost, or schedule of the project. A secondary risk is different from a residual risk, which is a risk that remains after a risk response has been implemented. A primary risk is the original risk that triggers a risk response. A normal risk is not a standard term in risk management, but it could refer to a risk that is expected or inherent in a project. References: PMI Risk Management Professional (PMI-RMP) Examination Content Outline and Specifications1, page 9; A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) – Sixth Edition, page 397; Secondary vs Residual Risk | Types of Risks on the PMP Exam.