Lisa is the project manager of the SQL project for her company. She has completed the risk response planning with her project team and is now ready to update the risk register to reflect the risk resp

Question

Options

• AThe level of detail must define exactly the risk response for each identified risk.
• BThe level of detail is set of project risk governance.
• CThe level of detail is set by historical information.
• DThe level of detail should correspond with the priority ranking.

• A
  6% (2)
• B
  3% (1)
• C
  16% (5)
• D
  74% (23)

Explanation

Option D is correct because in risk response planning, the level of detail documented in the risk register should be proportional to the risk's priority - high-priority risks warrant detailed, well-defined responses, while low-priority risks may only need a brief note or be placed on a watchlist. This is a core principle from the PMBOK Guide: resources and documentation effort should match the significance of the risk.

Why the distractors are wrong:

• A is too absolute - not every identified risk requires an exact, fully defined response. Low-priority risks often receive minimal or no active response.
• B is incorrect - project risk governance may set overall policies, but it does not dictate the level of detail for individual risk responses in the register.
• C is incorrect - historical information informs identification and probability estimates, not how much detail to record per response.

Memory tip: Think of it as a triage system - the more dangerous (higher priority) the risk, the more detail you document. "High priority = high detail" keeps the register practical and proportionate.

No community discussion yet for this question.