A construction project manager is overseeing a government infrastructure project using earned value management. At month 18 of a 30-month project, the metrics show: PV=$45M, EV=$38M, AC=$42M, BAC=$75M. A new administration has taken office and announced a comprehensive review of all capital projects, with emphasis on cost efficiency and transparency. The project has strategic importance for regional economic development but faces public criticism over cost overruns. The project sponsor asks the project manager to present options to the newly formed oversight committee. Which recommendation should the project manager present as PRIMARY priority?

Question

Accepted Answer

The correct answer is C. The project shows both schedule variance (SPI = 0.84, significantly behind) and cost variance (CPI = 0.90, over budget), making it vulnerable under new administration scrutiny. Before proposing solutions, the project manager must demonstrate analytical rigor and accountability by understanding root causes through forensic analysis, then presenting data-driven corrective actions with quantified impacts. This approach shows transparency and professionalism to the oversight committee. Option A (main distractor) suggests fast-tracking, which typically increases risk and cost—exactly wrong when CPI is already poor and public criticism exists about overruns. Fast-tracking without understanding why you're behind schedule often makes problems worse. Option B throws resources at symptoms without diagnosing causes, and Option D abandons a strategically important project prematurely. The political environment demands evidence-based decision-making, not reactive solutions.

PMP Practice Question: Business Environment — Predictive, Hard

More Business Environment Questions