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

The total contingency budget is the sum of the expected values of each risk. The expected value of a risk is the product of its probability and impact. Therefore, the expected value of risk A is 0.4 * 100,000 = US$40,000 and the expected value of risk B is 0.6 * 20,000 = US$12,000. The total contingency budget is 40,000 + 12,000 = US$52,000. However, this answer is not among the options given. The closest option is A. US$68,000, which might be the result of rounding up the expected values of each risk to the nearest thousand. This is a common practice in some projects to avoid dealing with small amounts of money. References: PMI. (2017). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) – Sixth Edition. Chapter 11: Project Risk Management, p. 406. 5

According to the PMBOK® Guide1, the risk management plan is a component of the project management plan that describes how risk management activities will be structured and performed. It provides guidance on how the project team will identify, analyze, respond, monitor, and control risks throughout the project life cycle. The risk management plan should be reviewed and updated whenever there are changes in the project scope, schedule, budget, or objectives, as these changes may introduce new risks or affect the existing ones. In this case, the organization’s decision to accelerate a key project is a significant change that may alter the risk profile of the project. Therefore, the first action for the project risk manager to take is to revise the risk management plan to reflect the new situation and ensure that the risk management processes are aligned with the project objectives and constraints. This is part of the Plan Risk Management process in the PMBOK® Guide1. References: 1: A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) – Sixth Edition

The risk identification technique that the risk manager should use is the nominal group technique. This technique involves bringing stakeholders together to brainstorm potential risks and then ranking them based on their importance. This allows for interaction and collaboration among stakeholders, which can help ensure that an exhaustive list of risks is created.

The nominal group technique is a risk identification technique that involves the interaction and collaboration of stakeholders to generate an exhaustive list of risks. It is a structured process that allows each participant to share their ideas independently, then rank and prioritize them as a group. This technique ensures that all opinions are considered and reduces the influence of dominant or biased individuals12

References: 1: PMI Risk Management Professional (PMI-RMP)® Handbook, page 10 2: A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) – Seventh Edition, page 11.2.2.1

 According to the PMBOK Guide, one of the tools and techniques for the plan risk management process is ground rules. Ground rules are the rules of conduct or behavior that are established by the project team and other stakeholders to ensure a productive and respectful environment for risk management activities. Ground rules can cover various aspects of risk management, such as roles and responsibilities, communication protocols, decision-making processes, meeting agendas, and conflict resolution methods1. By referring to the team’s ground rules on how to resolve conflicts, the risk manager can handle the situation where two key external stakeholders are overemphasizing the impact of a few project risks. This can help the risk manager to maintain a constructive and collaborative atmosphere in the risk reassessment workshop, as well as to ensure that the risk analysis and prioritization are based on objective and consistent criteria.

Some of the other options are not relevant or appropriate for the question scenario:

• Requesting for a skilled facilitator to help resolve conflicts that have arisen is not a feasible or effective option, as it would interrupt the flow of the risk reassessment workshop and delay the risk management process. The risk manager should be able to facilitate the workshop and handle conflicts by themselves, using the tools and techniques that they have planned and agreed upon with the project team and stakeholders.
• Running a sensitivity analysis to check which risks have the most impact is a technique for the perform quantitative risk analysis process, which is not applicable in the context of a risk reassessment workshop. A sensitivity analysis is a quantitative method that examines the effect of varying one risk parameter at a time on the project objectives, such as cost or schedule. It is not a tool for resolving conflicts or validating the impact of risks, as it does not consider the interrelationships and dependencies among risks or the probability of risk occurrence1.
• Using the assumption analysis technique to validate the assumptions is a technique for the identify risks process, which is not suitable for the situation where conflicts have already arisen in the risk reassessment workshop. An assumption analysis is a technique that explores the validity of the assumptions that are made during the project planning and risk management processes. It is not a tool for resolving conflicts or verifying the impact of risks, as it does not address the root causes or the consequences of the disagreements among the stakeholders1.

References: PMBOK Guide, 6th edition, pages 407-408, 431-432, 437-438, 441-4421; PMI-RMP Exam Content Outline, 2015, pages 7-8.

sensitivity analysis is a technique that helps to determine which risks have the most potential impact on the project. It examines the extent to which the uncertainty of each project element affects the objective being examined when all other uncertain elements are held at their baseline values. Sensitivity analysis is often used to assess the risk exposure of the project schedule and cost, and to identify the critical risks that need to be managed. In this case, the risk manager needs to understand how the new risk resulting from the delay will affect the project deadline, which is the objective being examined. By performing sensitivity analysis, the risk manager can compare the relative importance and interaction of the new risk with other existing risks, and determine the worst-case scenarios for the project completion date. Sensitivity analysis can also help to prioritize risks for response planning and to develop contingency reserves. This is part of the Perform Quantitative Risk Analysis process in the PMBOK® Guide2. References: 1: PMI Risk Management Professional (PMI-RMP)® Examination Content Outline 2: A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) – Sixth Edition

Reviewing published operational experience reports from similar projects or industries can help the risk manager objectively identify risks for the chemical laboratory project. These reports provide valuable insights into potential risks and lessons learned from other projects.

According to the PMBOK Guide, one of the tools and techniques for the identify risks process is data gathering. Data gathering is the process of collecting information from various sources to identify potential risks that may affect the project objectives. One of the data gathering techniques is document analysis, which involves reviewing and analyzing available project documents and other information sources to identify potential risks. Some of the documents that can be analyzed are project charter, project management plan, stakeholder register, assumptions log, agreements, and lessons learned1.

One of the information sources that can be useful for identifying risks in a project constructing a chemical laboratory is published operational experience reports. These are reports that document the experiences, lessons learned, best practices, and recommendations from other organizations or projects that have constructed or operated chemical laboratories. These reports can provide valuable insights into the common risks, challenges, and opportunities that are associated with chemical laboratory projects, such as safety hazards, environmental regulations, equipment failures, design specifications, quality standards, and stakeholder expectations. By reviewing published operational experience reports, the risk manager can objectively identify risks that are relevant and applicable to their project, as well as learn from the successes and failures of others23.

Some of the other options are not relevant or appropriate for the question scenario:

• Importing a risk register from other industry chemical laboratories is not a valid option, as it would not allow the risk manager to objectively identify risks that are specific and unique to their project. A risk register is a document that records the identified risks, their causes, impacts, responses, owners, and other information related to the risk management process. A risk register is a project-specific document that reflects the characteristics, objectives, and context of a particular project. Importing a risk register from other industry chemical laboratories would not ensure that the risks are relevant, accurate, or comprehensive for the risk manager’s project. Moreover, it would violate the intellectual property rights and confidentiality agreements of the other projects1.
• Defining chemical laboratory safety risk thresholds is not a tool or technique for identifying risks, but rather for performing qualitative risk analysis. Risk thresholds are the measures of the level of uncertainty or the level of impact at which a stakeholder may have a specific interest. Risk thresholds are used to determine the significance of each risk and to prioritize them for further analysis or action. Defining chemical laboratory safety risk thresholds would not help the risk manager to objectively identify risks, but rather to evaluate them1.
• Drafting threat and opportunity risks that come to mind is not an objective or systematic way of identifying risks, but rather a subjective and intuitive one. This option would rely on the risk manager’s personal judgment, experience, or creativity, which may not be sufficient or reliable for identifying risks in a project constructing a chemical laboratory. This option would also not ensure that the risks are based on factual and verifiable information sources, such as project documents or published reports. Drafting threat and opportunity risks that come to mind would not help the risk manager to objectively identify risks, but rather to generate them1.

References: PMBOK Guide, 6th edition, pages 397-399, 414-415, 431-432, 441-4421; Risk Management Professional (PMI-RMP)® Cert Guide, pages 63-642; Risk Management Professional Exam Outline, page 73.

 The project manager should proceed with the planned risk response to move the equipment, as this is the best way to deal with the weather-related risk that was identified and recorded in the risk register. A risk register is a document that lists all the identified risks, their causes, impacts, probabilities, and responses for a project1. A risk response is a strategy or action that is taken to reduce the negative effects or enhance the positive effects of a risk event2. A risk response should be planned and executed according to the risk management plan, which is a document that describes how risk management activities will be structured and performed on a project3. The risk management plan should also define the roles and responsibilities, risk categories, risk appetite and thresholds, risk identification and analysis methods, risk response strategies, risk monitoring and reporting mechanisms, and risk governance mechanisms3. Therefore, the project manager should follow the risk management plan and the risk register to implement the planned risk response to move the equipment, as this is the most effective and efficient way to manage the risk and meet the project objectives. Waiting until the weather improves before sending the equipment, asking the project sponsor to approve shipping the equipment, or requesting the shipment of the equipment to satisfy the client are not the best options to deal with the weather-related risk. Waiting until the weather improves may cause further delays and increase the cost and scope of the project, as well as damage the relationship with the client. Asking the project sponsor to approve shipping the equipment may not be necessary or feasible, as the project sponsor may not have the authority or the availability to make such a decision. Requesting the shipment of the equipment to satisfy the client may not be realistic or safe, as the bad weather may pose a threat to the quality and integrity of the equipment, as well as the health and safety of the people involved in the transportation. These options may also deviate from the risk management plan and the risk register, which may create confusion and inconsistency in the risk management process. References: 1, 2, 3.

After gathering cycle time data, the risk manager should perform a risk data quality assessment to ensure the data is accurate, reliable, and relevant for evaluating the current process and the new software.

 A risk data quality assessment is a technique to evaluate the degree to which the data about risks is useful and accurate for risk management. It involves examining the reliability, credibility, accuracy, and validity of the data collected. A risk data quality assessment can help the risk manager to determine the confidence level of the risk analysis and the quality of the risk responses. Performing a risk data quality assessment is the next logical step after gathering the cycle time data, as it will help to ensure that the data is suitable for further analysis and decision making. 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.