PMP · Question #1238
A company is moving its headquarters to another city. The project manager responsible for the assignment has been using a predictive approach during the transition. However, the information systems…
The correct answer is D. Use fixed-price increments as user stories are completed. For an agile IT migration project with financial control and delivery concerns, the project manager should opt for a contract that uses fixed-price increments tied to the completion of user stories.
Question
A company is moving its headquarters to another city. The project manager responsible for the assignment has been using a predictive approach during the transition. However, the information systems will be migrated using an agile approach. The project manager needs to decide which kind of contract to sign with the vendor responsible for migrating the systems. The project manager is concerned about controlling finances while delivering results. How should the project manager address this situation?
Options
- ASign a single agreement for the whole project.
- BConfirm payment after each project retrospective.
- CNegotiate payment after all project migration is completed.
- DUse fixed-price increments as user stories are completed.
How the community answered
(33 responses)- A12% (4)
- B6% (2)
- C3% (1)
- D79% (26)
Why each option
For an agile IT migration project with financial control and delivery concerns, the project manager should opt for a contract that uses fixed-price increments tied to the completion of user stories.
Signing a single agreement for the entire project in an agile context limits flexibility, makes it difficult to adapt to changes, and provides less granular financial control.
Confirming payment after each retrospective does not directly link payment to delivered value or specific increments; retrospectives are primarily for process improvement, not financial milestones.
Negotiating payment only after all project migration is completed is a lump-sum approach that offers little financial control or early visibility into progress for an agile, iterative project.
Using fixed-price increments linked to completed user stories is an effective contracting approach for agile projects. This method allows the project manager to control finances by paying for clearly defined, delivered value in short iterations, aligning with agile principles while managing budget constraints.
Concept tested: Agile contracting for value delivery
Source: https://www.pmi.org/disciplined-agile/agile-at-a-glance/agile-contracting
Topics
Community Discussion
7
Toby R.Jun 1, 2026D is correct. Fixed-price increments tied to completed user stories give you financial control per delivery, which is exactly what you want when mixing predictive overall governance with an agile migration.
Orla P.Jun 2, 2026Agreed on D, and the key on exam day is that completed means accepted by the product owner, not just dev-done, because that is the trigger for the fixed-price invoice.
Orla P.May 18, 2026Saw this one on my PMP last spring and almost overthought it. D is the move because fixed-price increments give you financial control on the agile side while tying payment to actual delivered user stories, which is exactly what the stem is asking for.
Hiroshi T.May 22, 2026D is correct per the PMI Agile Practice Guide section on agile contracts, which recommends fixed-price increments tied to completed features. A is tempting since the predictive work could use a single fixed-price agreement, but the question is scoped to the agile migration scope, not the whole relocation.
Lena V.Jun 15, 2026I first leaned toward B since tying payment to retrospectives sounds agile, but retrospectives are about process improvement, not formal acceptance of deliverables. The key phrase is controlling finances while delivering results, which points to fixed-price increments. D gives you cost control per increment and ties payment to completed user stories, which the vendor agrees to upfront. Confirmed D on exam last month.
Hiroshi T.Jun 16, 2026Agree on D, but worth noting that the PMBOK Guide frames this under the tailoring section for adaptive approaches, where the payment schedule is negotiated against delivered increments rather than individual user stories, since story-level acceptance is a team activity and the formal financial control sits at the increment boundary.
Luis F.Jun 11, 2026D is the right call here. Since the migration is agile, you want fixed-price increments tied to completed user stories so the vendor gets paid as value is delivered, not all at once or after some huge milestone. This approach keeps the finances predictable for each sprint while still giving the team flexibility to adapt. I almost picked B at first but realized retrospectives are about process improvement, not payment triggers.