PMI Certification PMI-RMP Passing Score

Documenting the results of the risk monitoring and controlling process is important for creating lessons learned. This helps future projects by providing a reference for risk management practices and experiences.

The documentation of the results of monitoring and controlling risks is a valuable source of information for lessons learned. Lessons learned are the documented information that reflects both the positive and negative experiences of a project. They represent the organization’s commitment to project management excellence and the project manager’s opportunity to learn from the actual experiences of others. By documenting the results of monitoring and controlling risks, the project team can capture the effectiveness of the risk responses, the changes in the risk exposure, the root causes of the risks, the best practices and the lessons learned for future projects. This documentation can help to improve the risk management process, enhance the project performance, and increase the organizationalknowledge base. References: PMI Risk Management Professional (PMI-RMP) Examination Content Outline and Specifications1, page 10; A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) – Sixth Edition, page 406; Lessons learned - PMI.

The risk registry is a document that records the identified risks, their characteristics, their status, and their responses. It is a key input for risk management and a source of information for project stakeholders. The risk manager should review the risk registry first to understand the current state of the project risks, especially the ones related to the client’s vendor, and to evaluate the effectiveness of the risk responses implemented so far. Enhancing risk identification, reviewing the contingency reserves, and creating a risk response plan are possible actions that the risk manager may take after reviewing the risk registry, but they are not the first thing to do. References: PMI Risk Management Professional (PMI-RMP)® Exam Content Outline1, PMI Practice Standard for Project Risk Management2, Risk Management Professional (PMI-RMP)® Cert Guide3

The project manager should have performed an analysis to ensure that the change request was valid and well-supported before submitting it to the sponsor. This would help in making a strong case for the change request and increase the chances of its approval.

The project manager should have performed an analysis to affirm the request is valid before submitting, as this would help to justify the need for the change and to demonstrate its impact on the project objectives, scope, schedule, cost, quality, and risk. The project manager should also have consulted with the project team, the subcontractor, and the risk owner to determine the best risk response strategy and to estimate the resources and time required for the change. By performing an analysis, the project manager could have increased the chances of getting the change request approved by the sponsor and avoided wasting time and effort on an invalid request. References: The Standard for Risk Management in Portfolios, Programs, and Projects, page 79; PMBOK Guide, 6th edition, page 115.

The risk manager should include an escalation process in the risk management plan to address risks that may impact other projects. This ensures that any identified risks that could affect multiple projects are communicated and managed appropriately across the organization.

The risk manager should include an escalation process in the risk management plan to deal with risks that may affect other projects or the organization as a whole. An escalation process is a set of procedures that defines how and when risks should be communicated to higher levels of authority or responsibility for decision making or resolution. The escalation process should specify the criteria, roles, responsibilities, and communication channels for escalating risks. The risk manager should follow the escalation process when identifying risks that may have extensive impacts beyond the scope of the project. The other options are not appropriate actions for the risk manager to take. Contacting the risk managers of the other projects and informing them is not sufficient, as it does not ensure that the risks are properly addressed or resolved. Taking note of the extensive impact of these risks in the risk register is not enough, as it does not involve the necessary stakeholders or decision makers. Addressing the unique characteristics of these risks on a case-by-case basis is not consistent, as it does not follow a standard process or protocol. References: 2, 3, 4