PMP Practice Questions #71
As a project manager, you hired an expensive technical Subject Matter Expert (SME) for a six-month period to provide specialized advice on your project. After three months, you realize that the SME’s contributions are not significantly beneficial to the project’s progress. What is the most appropriate action for you to take?
A. Maintain the SME’s contract for the remaining three months since it is already budgeted in the project.
B. Review the terms of the contract for potential early termination, and consider terminating the contract.
C. Evaluate the SME’s contributions in detail and assess the impact that releasing the expert early might have on the project’s success, before making any decision on the contract.
D. Reduce the SME’s working hours instead of fully terminating the contract, to balance cost savings with the potential for future contributions.
Analysis:
As a project manager overseeing a software development project, you are faced with the challenge of an expensive technical Subject Matter Expert (SME) whose contributions, after three months, are not significantly benefiting the project’s progress. This situation requires a strategic decision regarding the SME’s contract and involvement in the project for the remaining three months.
Analysis of Options:
Option A: Maintain the SME’s contract for the remaining three months since it is already budgeted in the project. This option suggests keeping the SME’s contract as is for the remaining three months since it has already been budgeted. However, this approach might not be cost-effective or beneficial to the project. Continuing with an underperforming resource without reassessing their contribution could lead to inefficient use of the project budget.
Option B: Review the terms of the contract for potential early termination, and consider terminating the contract. Option B involves reviewing the terms of the SME’s contract for potential early termination. This action indicates a proactive stance towards addressing the issue of underperformance. It suggests considering contract termination if it is found to be beneficial for the project, which could result in cost savings. However, this option jumps directly to the possibility of termination without first thoroughly assessing the SME’s impact on the project. It assumes that termination might be beneficial but does not consider the potential negative effects of this action on the project’s progress.
Option C: Evaluate the SME’s contributions in detail and assess the impact that releasing the expert early might have on the project’s success, before making any decision on the contract. This option proposes a detailed evaluation of the SME’s contributions and assessing the impact that releasing the expert early might have on the project’s success. This approach is comprehensive, as it considers both the current contributions and the potential future impact of the SME on the project. It is a balanced approach that involves making an informed decision based on thorough analysis. This detailed assessment ensures any decision made is grounded in a clear understanding of how the SME’s presence or absence affects the project’s success.
Option D: Reduce the SME’s working hours instead of fully terminating the contract, to balance cost savings with the potential for future contributions. Reducing the SME’s working hours as a compromise between fully retaining and terminating the contract is a moderate approach. This could potentially balance cost savings with the possibility of future contributions from the SME. However, like Option B, it does not mention a detailed evaluation of the SME’s impact, and the decision to reduce hours may be premature without this analysis.
Conclusion:
Given the need for a thoughtful and informed decision, Option C (Evaluate the SME’s contributions in detail and assess the impact that releasing the expert early might have on the project’s success) appears to be the most appropriate. This option provides a comprehensive approach to understanding the SME’s role and effectiveness in the project before making any contractual changes. It allows for a decision based on a thorough assessment, ensuring that any action taken is in the best interest of the project’s success and financial efficiency. The other options, while presenting possible solutions, do not offer the same level of detailed evaluation and consideration as Option C.
PMP Exam Content Outline Mapping
| Domain | Task |
|---|---|
| Process | Task 5: Plan and manage budget and resources |
| Process | Task 3 Assess and manage risks |
Topics Covered
- Budget Forecast
- Control Cost
- Resource Management
