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

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.

 

When a risk manager notices that the risk register is missing key data, the most critical information they will require first includes the risk description, risk probability, and risk impact. These elements are fundamental to understanding each risk and planning appropriate responses. The risk description provides a clear understanding of what the risk is, while the probability and impact help in assessing the severity and likelihood of the risk occurring, which are essential for prioritizing and managing risks effectively.

PMI’s risk management guidelines emphasize the importance of having these core data points to effectively manage risks throughout the project lifecycle​​.

 

 

 

In highly complex projects where changes and new information are expected to arise continually, it's crucial to implement a dynamic and frequent risk management process. This approach ensures that risks are identified, assessed, and addressed promptly as they emerge throughout the project lifecycle. By regularly updating risk assessments and involving key stakeholders in ongoing risk discussions, the project team can maintain a proactive stance, effectively mitigating potential issues before they escalate. This continuous engagement fosters transparency and reduces stakeholder anxiety by demonstrating a commitment to managing uncertainties actively.

PMI Risk Management Study Guide References:

The importance of a dynamic risk management process is emphasized in the PMI-RMP Exam Preparation Study Guide, which highlights the need for continuous risk assessment and stakeholder engagement to adapt to evolving project conditions.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth Explanation:

Extreme Programming (XP) emphasizes continuous feedback, early testing, and adaptive planning. When discrepancies arise, XP encourages identifying root causes and taking corrective actions without delaying value delivery.

Option D: Run a spike, identify what went wrong during implementation, and request a change to enhance value delivery (Correct Answer).

A spike is a time-boxed research activity used to explore a problem, test assumptions, and mitigate uncertainty in XP methodology.

By running a spike, the team analyzes what went wrong in implementation and applies the findings to ensure future iterations align with customer needs.

The PMI-RMP Guide states that “proactive risk response planning helps teams course-correct and maintain delivery momentum” (PMI-RMP Exam Prep Study Guide, 2021, p. 142).

The Agile Practice Guide supports the use of spikes, highlighting that “spikes allow agile teams to validate uncertainties in requirements, leading to more informed decision-making” (PMI & Agile Alliance, 2017, p. 89).

Option A: Release this version and leave changes to be done at the end of the project phase (Incorrect).

XP emphasizes continuous improvement and early defect resolution rather than postponing fixes.

Leaving changes until later may increase technical debt and reduce user satisfaction.

Option B: Arrange a workshop where all ideas will be discussed and take corrective actions ensuring value delivery (Partially Correct but Not the Best Answer).

While workshops help gather feedback, they do not provide technical validation of what went wrong.

A spike (Option D) is a better approach because it directly investigates the issue and leads to actionable changes.

Option C: Ask the development team to brainstorm and come up with suggestions that will improve the delivery date (Incorrect).

Brainstorming may generate ideas but does not analyze the root cause of the discrepancies.

Without a structured approach like a spike, there is a risk of guessing rather than using data-driven solutions.

Final Verdict:

The best answer is D (Run a spike, identify what went wrong during implementation, and request a change to enhance value delivery) because a spike provides empirical insights, leading to more effective corrective actions.