PMP · Question #1142
A project manager finds a mistake with an important server acquisition. The acquisition was expected for a critical path activity but has not arrived yet, causing significant impacts on time and cost.
The correct answer is B. Escalation process. A project manager discovers a critical server acquisition is delayed, causing significant time and cost impacts, despite the team member's attempts to contact the supplier. To prevent such issues from escalating unaddressed, an escalation process is crucial.
Question
A project manager finds a mistake with an important server acquisition. The acquisition was expected for a critical path activity but has not arrived yet, causing significant impacts on time and cost. The team member responsible for this activity argues that they sent several emails to the supplier but received no reply. Which document should be used to help avoid this kind of situation?
Options
- ACommunications management plan
- BEscalation process
- CStatement of work (SOW)
- DStakeholder register
How the community answered
(40 responses)- A8% (3)
- B73% (29)
- C18% (7)
- D3% (1)
Why each option
A project manager discovers a critical server acquisition is delayed, causing significant time and cost impacts, despite the team member's attempts to contact the supplier. To prevent such issues from escalating unaddressed, an escalation process is crucial.
A communications management plan outlines how information is shared, but it does not specify the steps or responsibilities for escalating issues when communication fails or a problem persists.
An escalation process provides a defined pathway for unresolved issues, such as unresponsiveness from a critical supplier, to be quickly brought to the attention of higher authorities or stakeholders who can intervene. This ensures that critical path delays due to external dependencies are addressed promptly rather than remaining stuck at a lower level.
A Statement of Work (SOW) defines project scope and deliverables but does not include procedures for handling supplier non-compliance or communication breakdowns.
A stakeholder register identifies stakeholders and their engagement levels but does not detail the operational process for escalating procurement or communication issues.
Concept tested: Project issue and risk escalation
Topics
Community Discussion
5
Prof. SaraJun 6, 2026B is correct. Emails going unanswered on a critical path activity is a classic escalation gap, and the escalation process defines exactly who to contact and how to raise the issue when a supplier stops responding, before it spirals into a cost and schedule mess.
Brenda K.Jun 21, 2026B is correct and this one should take you maybe 20 seconds, flag it as a quick win. The stem is screaming at you: critical path impact plus an unresponsive supplier plus a team member just firing off emails into the void. That is a textbook escalation scenario where you need a defined path to pull in the right people rather than hoping someone replies. C traps people because the SOW governs what the supplier delivers, not how you fix a communication breakdown. The escalation process is what gets you out of the email spiral and forces action before the schedule slips further. One thing I keep second
Prof. SaraJun 23, 2026Agreed on B, and the quick-win framing is spot on, but I would add one nuance: make sure the escalation path is written in the contract or procurement management plan, not just assumed to exist, because on the exam an escalation with no documented path is a trap that pushes you toward C.
Viktor S.Jun 12, 2026Going with D here. The supplier not responding is a stakeholder engagement breakdown, and the stakeholder register is where you'd have flagged their interest, influence, and communication expectations so this silent-treatment scenario gets caught before it wrecks your critical path.
Brenda K.Jun 13, 2026B is right here, Viktor, because a non-responsive supplier is a contract issue and you escalate through procurement or contract management channels, not the stakeholder register. The stakeholder register tracks interests and influence, but when a vendor goes silent on a critical path you lean on the contractual relationship, not engagement notes. Quick win if you spot the supplier-versus-stakeholder distinction, otherwise flag and revisit.