PMI-ACP Practice Questions #104
As a Product Owner, you are working with three key stakeholders on a new digital product:
- Sophia (Chief Financial Officer – CFO): Controls budget approvals but is not involved in daily product decisions.
- David (Marketing Lead): Actively tracks product updates and wants frequent discussions on customer impact.
- Alex (Engineering Manager): Ensures technical feasibility but prefers focusing on execution rather than strategy.
How should you manage these stakeholders effectively?
A. Give Sophia periodic high-level updates, involve David in regular discussions, and consult Alex when technical decisions arise.
B. Engage all three equally in discussions to ensure transparency and alignment across financial, marketing, and technical aspects.
C. Provide Sophia with detailed product progress reports, loop David in only when major changes impact marketing, and keep Alex actively involved in feature planning.
D. Hold frequent meetings with Sophia to align on budget, give David a summary of key decisions, and let Alex focus on execution without involvement in product strategy.
Analysis
The question requires managing three key stakeholders—Sophia (CFO), David (Marketing Lead), and Alex (Engineering Manager)—with different levels of power and interest in a digital product. The key to effective stakeholder management in Agile is engaging stakeholders appropriately based on their involvement, influence, and needs.
- Sophia (CFO) has high power but low interest—she controls budget approvals but is not involved in daily product decisions. She requires high-level updates without frequent engagement.
- David (Marketing Lead) has high interest in product updates and customer impact, meaning he needs regular discussions and detailed insights. His power level is not explicitly stated but is likely moderate to high.
- Alex (Engineering Manager) focuses on technical feasibility and execution but prefers to stay out of strategy discussions. His power is low, and his interest is unclear but likely moderate.
The best approach should align with the power-interest grid, ensuring low-involvement stakeholders (Sophia) receive summary updates, while high-interest stakeholders (David) are engaged frequently. Technical stakeholders (Alex) should be consulted as needed but not overloaded with non-execution-related discussions.
Analysis of Options:
A: Give Sophia periodic high-level updates, involve David in regular discussions, and consult Alex when technical decisions arise.
This is the best approach as it tailors engagement based on stakeholder needs:
- Sophia receives only high-level updates, respecting her low interest while keeping her informed for budget approvals.
- David is actively engaged in discussions, aligning with his need for frequent updates.
- Alex is consulted on technical matters, ensuring feasibility without involving him in unnecessary strategic discussions.
This option correctly applies stakeholder management principles and balances engagement effectively.
B: Engage all three equally in discussions to ensure transparency and alignment across financial, marketing, and technical aspects.
This is not an effective approach because stakeholders have different levels of power and interest. Treating all three equally would overburden low-interest stakeholders (Sophia and Alex) while not giving David the dedicated engagement he needs. Agile stakeholder management should be tailored, not uniform.
C: Provide Sophia with detailed product progress reports, loop David in only when major changes impact marketing, and keep Alex actively involved in feature planning.
This option is flawed because:
- Sophia does not need detailed progress reports—she only requires high-level updates.
- David should be engaged regularly, not just for major changes, as he actively tracks customer impact.
- Alex prefers execution over strategy and does not need to be actively involved in feature planning.
D: Hold frequent meetings with Sophia to align on budget, give David a summary of key decisions, and let Alex focus on execution without involvement in product strategy.
This approach is ineffective because:
- Frequent meetings with Sophia are unnecessary—she has low interest and only needs periodic updates.
- Giving David only a summary of key decisions does not align with his need for frequent engagement.
- Alex is entirely removed from product strategy, which may not be ideal as technical feasibility should still be considered in planning.
Conclusion
The best answer is Option A, as it correctly balances stakeholder engagement by providing high-level updates to Sophia, regular discussions with David, and consulting Alex on technical decisions as needed. This approach aligns with Agile stakeholder management best practices and ensures efficient collaboration without overloading or under-engaging any stakeholder.
PMI – ACP Exam Content Outline Mapping
| Domain | Task |
| Delivery | Actively Engage Customers |
Topics Covered:
- Identify stakeholder power and interest levels to tailor engagement effectively.
- Provide high-level updates for low-involvement stakeholders (e.g., CFO) while ensuring frequent discussions with high-interest stakeholders (e.g., Marketing Lead).
- Consult technical stakeholders (Engineering Manager) only when needed to prevent unnecessary strategic involvement while ensuring feasibility.
- Prioritize stakeholder needs by ensuring the right level of communication and involvement for each role.
- Balance strategic decision-making with execution focus, keeping engagement aligned with Agile principles.
If you’re preparing for the PMI Agile Certified Practitioner (PMI-ACP)® Exam, we highly recommend enrolling in our PMI-ACP® Exam Prep Program. Designed to provide a comprehensive Agile learning experience, this program not only helps you ace the PMI-ACP® exam but also enhances your Agile mindset, leadership skills, and ability to deliver value-driven projects. Ensure exam success and career growth with our expert-led, structured preparation program tailored for Agile professionals.
