Exam PMP topic 1 question 487 discussion

i would pick DE, try getting their buy in but if it fails i need a mitigation plan if they really sue

To handle this kind of stakeholder resistance, the project manager should: Communicate benefits clearly (B) Engage directly and consistently with stakeholders (D)

By focusing on communication, engagement, and transparency (Options B and D), the project manager can address resistance, manage stakeholder expectations, and work towards a successful project outcome.

B. Publish information on the city's website about the benefits that the new tram station will bring E. Register this situation as a risk and develop a mitigation plan B is important because proactively communicating the benefits of the project to the community can help address concerns, reduce resistance, and build public support. By providing transparent information, the city can educate residents about the positive impact of the new tram station and counteract the negative perceptions. E is essential because the threat of legal action from the neighbors represents a potential risk to the project. Registering this as a risk and developing a mitigation plan allows the project team to prepare for possible outcomes and implement strategies to minimize the risk of project delays or cancellation.

The problem has already occurred and has become an issue.

DE is the most direct approach. B is too general and indirect.

this problem has already happened,. Why do you consider it as a risk? can anybody explain

Given the potential legal implications and the direct impact on the project's viability, it would be prudent for the project manager to consider this as a significant risk. This underscores the importance of having a clear and structured response to such threats, which a risk mitigation plan would provide. So, if we were to prioritize the options based on the severity and immediacy of the issue (legal threats), then option E would indeed be one of the top actions to take, alongside direct engagement with the neighbors (option D) to address and potentially alleviate their concerns.

D. Conduct regular meetings with the neighbors to get their buy-in for the project E. Register this situation as a risk and develop a mitigation plan Avoid one way communication which the option b implies

Addressing the situation directly with the mayor before legal action is taken is a crucial step to try and resolve the concerns amicably. So C. While addressing the mayor is important, having a contingency plan in place in case the concerns escalate further can help manage the potential legal risk effectively. Thats E.

From the PMI website. These neighbors are considered as Environmental Stakeholders. The key to securing stakeholder engagement revolves around satisfying stakeholder requirements and managing their expectations. To further illustrate, when managing projects, project managers need to “sell” the project to the project team members, executives, and ENVIROMENTAL stakeholders, simply by demonstrating (truthfully of course) that the project will deliver to them what they require from it, or other benefits, many of which they may not be aware of.

Why not C, D?

Going for BE

It is the citizens that had a problem not the mayor.We must them explore ways to reach the people resistant to this project.MEETINGS AND THROUGH WEBSITE where they can pull the information(benefits) sounds good.

I will stick with B & D. Its not about convincing the mayor, it is about convincing the stakeholders (neighbors). No matter how convinced the mayor is does not help convince the neighbors.

B&E https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/secure-360-stakeholder-buy-in-9306

I would go with B and C for this. Meeting with the neighbors may be good, but you likely will just be wasting time trying to get their buy-in, since the issue is with the tram itself. You're better off meeting with the mayor, who is a more important stakeholder in the project.