PMP · Question #1296
A project sponsor is concerned that the scope is not being met correctly and has questioned several team members about this individually. When the project sponsor approached the project manager, the p
The correct answer is A. Facilitate a stakeholder alignment session so that the team and project sponsor are in agreement. When there's a misalignment in scope understanding between the project sponsor and the team, the project manager should facilitate a dedicated alignment session to achieve common understanding and agreement.
Question
A project sponsor is concerned that the scope is not being met correctly and has questioned several team members about this individually. When the project sponsor approached the project manager, the project manager realized that the issue was that the project sponsor understood the scope in a different manner than the project team. What should the project manager do to address this issue?
Options
- AFacilitate a stakeholder alignment session so that the team and project sponsor are in agreement
- BSet up a daily standup and request that the project sponsor attend to understand the project's
- CAsk the project team to compile a project scope document and obtain approval from the project
- DRequest that the project team change their task deliverables to reflect the project sponsor's
How the community answered
(61 responses)- A74% (45)
- B3% (2)
- C8% (5)
- D15% (9)
Why each option
When there's a misalignment in scope understanding between the project sponsor and the team, the project manager should facilitate a dedicated alignment session to achieve common understanding and agreement.
Facilitating a stakeholder alignment session is the most effective way to address differing understandings of the project scope. This allows all parties to openly discuss expectations, clarify requirements, and reach a consensus, ensuring everyone is on the same page.
A daily standup is for the development team's internal coordination and progress updates; it's not the appropriate forum for resolving fundamental scope misunderstandings with a sponsor.
Compiling a scope document assumes one doesn't exist or is insufficient, and it still requires a collaborative session to ensure the sponsor's agreement, which is better achieved directly through alignment.
Immediately changing deliverables to reflect only the sponsor's understanding bypasses the team's input and established scope, potentially leading to additional issues and scope creep without proper validation.
Concept tested: Stakeholder alignment and scope clarification
Topics
Community Discussion
7
Fatima Z.Jul 5, 2026A is your answer here, and I remember it on exam day by picturing "SAS" for Sponsor Alignment Session, because you want everyone Seeing the Same scope. The sponsor and team each built a different picture in their heads, so the fix is to get them in one room and sync up those mental maps before any rework happens. B wastes the sponsor's time, C creates a document nobody reads, and D blindly bends to the sponsor without checking if their view is even correct. When you see "understood differently" on the test, think "misalignment" and grab the alignment
Mei-Ling H.Jul 7, 2026Good catch on "understood differently" equaling misalignment, but watch the qualifier "should" in the stem because if it asked what the PM should do "first", you might need a one-on-one with the sponsor before any group session.
Lena V.Jul 5, 2026A. D is the trap since you never change scope to match one persons misunderstanding.
Anjali D.Jul 2, 2026A is the consensus but B tempted a few of us as daily standup regulars.
Mei-Ling H.Jul 5, 2026Confirmed A on my exam last month. The key word here is "understood the scope in a different manner" which points directly to a misalignment between the project sponsor and the team. Option A is the only choice that fixes the root cause by getting both parties to actually talk to each other and reach a shared understanding. Option C is a trap because the scope document already exists and the real problem is not a missing document but a different interpretation of what it means. Option B would waste time and option D is wrong because you do not just change deliverables to match one person's view without a
Orla P.Jul 7, 2026Good breakdown on A but heads up your sentence got cut off at the end there, and one logistics note: if you get a question like this and you are torn between A and C, flag it and come back at the end because the scope-vs-interpretation distinction is easier to see after your brain has cooled down on the other questions.
Orla P.Jul 5, 2026A is correct. A facilitated alignment session resolves the scope interpretation gap directly.