PMP Project Management Professional 2025 past questions and answers

1. Help the team connect with the specialist and remove the organizational impediment while leaving the technical decision with the team.
2. Ask the sponsor to replace the specialist immediately.
3. Direct the team to proceed without the security review to protect sprint velocity.
4. Take over the design decision and issue instructions to the developers.

Answer: A. Help the team connect with the specialist and remove the organizational impediment while leaving the technical decision with the team.

A servant leader enables the team by removing impediments and facilitating access to needed expertise, while the team retains ownership of its solution. B and C bypass collaboration or necessary review; D undermines self-management.

1. Escalate the disagreement to the sponsor and ask the sponsor to choose a date.
2. Bring the leads together to clarify assumptions, review dependencies and negotiate a mutually workable date.
3. Use the engineering lead's date because engineering owns the deliverable.
4. Record the disagreement as a risk and continue planning without resolving it.

Answer: B. Bring the leads together to clarify assumptions, review dependencies and negotiate a mutually workable date.

A facilitated, collaborative discussion addresses the underlying assumptions and seeks a durable resolution at the appropriate level. Escalation or unilateral selection is premature, while simply logging the dispute leaves a current issue unresolved.

1. Remove the analyst from the project and reassign all of the work.
2. Report the analyst's performance to the sponsor without discussing it with the analyst.
3. Meet privately with the analyst to understand the cause and agree on support and a specific improvement plan.
4. Lower the team's performance target so the missed handoffs are no longer visible.

Answer: C. Meet privately with the analyst to understand the cause and agree on support and a specific improvement plan.

A private, respectful conversation can uncover a blocker or capability need and support a measurable improvement plan. Immediate removal or escalation is disproportionate without understanding the cause, and lowering the target hides rather than resolves the problem.

1. Ask the team to finish the design and invite the group to comment only at final acceptance.
2. Have the sponsor select one representative and prevent other residents from influencing scope.
3. Send a requirements survey and make all product decisions within the project team.
4. Invite residents to discovery and prototype reviews, clarify how their feedback informs priorities, and include them in defining acceptance needs.

Answer: D. Invite residents to discovery and prototype reviews, clarify how their feedback informs priorities, and include them in defining acceptance needs.

Early, accessible participation lets stakeholders shape outcomes and understand how their input affects decisions. Final-stage consultation or an opaque survey provides much less influence and risks discovering usability barriers too late.

1. Facilitate a respectful discussion focused on evidence, technical risks and the shared product goal.
2. Choose the developer with the longest tenure and close the discussion.
3. Move one developer to another team without exploring the disagreement.
4. Ask the product owner to decide which technical approach the developers must use.

Answer: A. Facilitate a respectful discussion focused on evidence, technical risks and the shared product goal.

Refocusing the conversation on evidence and shared objectives helps the team resolve the technical issue collaboratively and repair the interaction. Tenure-based decisions, reassignment or asking the product owner to dictate implementation avoid the underlying conflict.