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

The risk manager should first update the risk register with the new risk identified by the vendor. This will help in keeping track of all the risks associated with the project and facilitate the subsequent planning and management of the risks.

 The risk manager should update the new risk in the risk register, which is a project document that records the details of all identified risks, including their description, category, cause, probability, impact, and response strategy. Updating the risk register is the first step to acknowledge the existence of the new risk and to document its characteristics and potential effects on the project objectives. The risk register can then be used as an input for the Plan Risk Responses process, where the risk manager can develop appropriate actions to address the new risk. References: PMI, A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide), Sixth Edition, 2017, p. 397, 441.

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 risk manager is responsible for ensuring that all risks, including secondary risks, are identified and addressed during the risk response planning process. If key secondary risks were missed, the risk manager should be held accountable. (Reference: Project Management Institute. A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) – Sixth Edition, Section 11.5)

The risk manager is responsible for identifying and analyzing risks, as well as planning and implementing risk responses. Secondary risks are those risks that arise as a direct result of implementing a risk response to a specific risk. The risk manager should have considered the potential secondary risks during the risk response planning and updated the risk register accordingly. The project manager should hold the risk manager accountable for missing the secondary risks and ensure that they are properly addressed12

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.

An affinity diagram is a tool used to visually organize and group risks or ideas based on their similarities and categories. It helps in structuring the risks for further analysis and discussion. (Reference: PMBOK Guide, 6th Edition, p. 138)

 According to the PMBOK Guide, an affinity diagram is a tool and technique for the identify risks process that allows large numbers of ideas to be sorted into groups for review and analysis. An affinity diagram can help the risk manager to visually organize the risks identified in the pre-workshop survey by grouping them into categories based on their similarities or common characteristics. This can help the risk manager to facilitate the risk analysis and prioritization in the workshop, as well as to stimulate new patterns of thinking and generate additional risks.

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

The analytical hierarchy process is a technique for the plan risk management process that provides a method for comparing and ranking alternatives based on multiple criteria. It is not a tool for visually organizing risks.

A SWOT analysis is a technique for the identify risks process that examines the project from the perspective of its strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. It is not a tool for visually organizing risks, but rather for generating them.

Assigning probability and impact is a technique for the perform qualitative risk analysis process that assesses the likelihood and the potential effect of each individual risk on the project objectives. It is not a tool for visually organizing risks, but rather for evaluating them.

References: PMBOK Guide, 6th edition, pages 397-399, 414-415, 431-432, 441-442; PMI-RMP Exam Content Outline, 2015, page 7.

The risk manager should recommend that the project manager review the plans for the key activity, as this will help identify potential issues and opportunities to improve the activity's performance and reduce its impact on the critical path.

The risk manager should recommend the project manager to review the plans for the key activity, which is now on the critical path according to the Monte Carlo simulation. The critical path is the sequence of activities that determines the minimum possible duration of the project. Any delay on the critical path will affect the project completion date. Therefore, it is important to review the plans for the key activity and identify any potential risks, issues, or opportunities that may affect its performance. The risk manager and the project manager should also evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of any risk response strategies for the key activity, such as fast-tracking, crashing, or resource optimization. The other options are not appropriate recommendations for the risk manager to make. Adding more float to the key activity is not possible, since the critical path has zero float by definition. Adding more contingency to the project may not address the specific risks or issues related to the key activity. Increasing the budget for the key activity may not improve its duration or quality, and may also increase the project cost baseline unnecessarily. References: PMI Risk Management Professional (PMI-RMP) Examination Content Outline and Specifications, page 91. A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) – Sixth Edition, pages 215-2162. Project Critical Path Analysis Using Monte Carlo Simulation3.

 

 

With 25 identified risks, and considering the constraints and resources available, the appropriate next step is to perform a qualitative risk analysis. This process helps prioritize the risks based on their probability and impact, as well as other relevant factors like urgency, proximity, and detectability. By doing so, the team can focus on the most significant risks that require immediate attention and develop response plans accordingly, optimizing the use of available resources. PMI recommends this approach to ensure that risk management efforts are both efficient and effective in addressing the most critical risks first​.

 

 

Renting equipment until the critical piece is repaired is a "Mitigate" response. Mitigation involves taking actions to reduce the impact or likelihood of a risk event. In this case, renting equipment is a way to reduce the impact of the equipment breakdown on the project’s timeline and execution, thereby ensuring that the project can continue with minimal disruption.

PMI’s guidelines describe mitigation as a strategy to reduce the severity or probability of a risk, making it a suitable response in this scenario​​.