PeopleCert MSP-Practitioner Practice Test Questions Answers

'Leading change' principle in MSP focuses on driving transformation through the right leadership, engaging stakeholders actively, and fostering innovative solutions. However, getting approval from the sponsoring group is not considered part of this principle but rather a responsibility addressed in programme organization under governance themes. Approval processes are formalized separately from the leadership approach.

A key attribute for a Programme Manager is a good knowledge of project management approaches. This expertise enables the Programme Manager to oversee and coordinate multiple interrelated projects, ensuring they deliver outputs that collectively realize programme objectives.

The MSP Practitioner states: “Programme Manager should have good project management skills,” emphasizing that while strategic leadership and stakeholder engagement are important, the ability to manage the complexities of project delivery is fundamental to the Programme Manager role.

While change management skills and access to key stakeholders are important complementary abilities, the core responsibility of managing project delivery across a dossier of projects necessitates strong project management knowledge. The Programme Manager acts as the bridge between strategic programme objectives and tactical project execution, requiring detailed understanding of project methodologies, risk management, scheduling, resource coordination, and quality assurance.

This knowledge supports effective integration, issue resolution, and benefits delivery, positioning the Programme Manager as a central figure in programme success.

The POTI (Projects, Operations, Teams, and Infrastructure) model is part of the Blueprint governance theme. It defines the high-level scope and structure of the blueprint, outlining how projects, operational activities, teams, and infrastructure work together to deliver transformation.

The MSP Practitioner confirms: “POTI model defines scope blueprint,” situating it firmly within the Blueprint theme that describes the future state and the means to achieve it.

Understanding POTI helps in mapping and managing the components necessary for successful delivery of programme benefits within the defined future organizational state.

The principle “Remaining aligned with corporate strategy” requires programmes to be both robust and flexible, enabling them to adapt to frequent and sometimes radical strategic shifts. The MSP Practitioner clarifies that “Programmes need to adjust to strategic changes of organization so they should be robust and flexible to achieve that.” This principle ensures programmes remain relevant and aligned throughout their lifecycle despite changes in organizational priorities or external conditions, enabling successful transformation delivery.

Comprehensive and Detailed 200 to 250 words of Explanation From Exact Extract of project-programme-and-portfolio-management of 5th Edition MSP:

In the 'Identify the programme' process, the goal is to establish a high-level justification for the programme. At this early stage, detailed information is rarely available, and the investment of significant time and resources into precise budgeting is not yet warranted. However, a "rough order of magnitude" estimate is essential for the Sponsoring Group to make an informed decision about whether the programme is worth pursuing.

Option B is the correct answer because the Programme Brief must contain a high-level business case. This includes an initial estimate of costs, benefits, and risks. The use of historical data (the previous electricity and gas rollout) is a common and appropriate technique for "top-down" estimation during this process. This "understanding of the cost" allows the SRO to determine if the programme aligns with the organization's financial capacity before committing to the more expensive 'Design the outcomes' and 'Plan progressive delivery' processes. While Option A is partially true in that detailed budgets aren't required yet, the reason it is appropriate is specifically to enable the initial "go/no-go" decision. Option C is incorrect because while more detail is added later, some estimation is mandatory now. Option D is a valid risk to the accuracy of the estimate, but it does not make the application of the process inappropriate; adjustments for the different utility types would simply be part of the estimation logic.