PMP · Question #1425
A project sponsor has approved the project charter and business case. The project manager has reviewed the artifacts to initiate the project and is unclear if the intended benefits of the project…
The correct answer is D. Meet with the project sponsor to better understand the strategy benefits of the project. If a project manager is unclear about the strategic alignment and benefits of an approved project charter and business case, the first action should be to consult with the project sponsor.
Question
A project sponsor has approved the project charter and business case. The project manager has reviewed the artifacts to initiate the project and is unclear if the intended benefits of the project align with the strategic objectives of the business. What should the project manager do first?
Options
- AStat executing the project since leadership is responsible for the business strategy.
- BPropose an updated business case and project charter that are more aligned with the business
- CConduct qualitative and quantitative risk analysis and record the results in the risk register.
- DMeet with the project sponsor to better understand the strategy benefits of the project.
How the community answered
(41 responses)- A2% (1)
- B17% (7)
- C7% (3)
- D73% (30)
Why each option
If a project manager is unclear about the strategic alignment and benefits of an approved project charter and business case, the first action should be to consult with the project sponsor.
Starting project execution without understanding strategic alignment risks delivering a product or service that fails to meet the organization's overarching business objectives.
Proposing updated documents without first clarifying the existing strategic intent with the sponsor is premature and could lead to unnecessary rework or misinterpretations.
Conducting risk analysis is a crucial planning activity, but it should follow a clear understanding of the project's fundamental objectives and strategic benefits, which is currently lacking.
The project sponsor is the primary owner and advocate for the project's strategic alignment and benefits realization. Meeting with them directly is the most effective and appropriate first step to gain clarity, understand the strategic context, and ensure the project's objectives truly support business goals.
Concept tested: Project strategic alignment and sponsor communication
Topics
Community Discussion
11
Lena V.May 3, 2026D is the right call here. The PM is unclear on strategic alignment, so the first move is to go straight to the source and meet with the sponsor to clarify how the project benefits tie back to business objectives. You do not update the business case or charter before you even understand the strategy, which rules out B. The sponsor owns the strategic vision, and the PM needs that context before anything else happens.
Samuel O.Oct 19, 2025D is the right call. The sponsor owns the connection between the project and organizational strategy, so when that linkage is unclear you go straight to the source rather than guessing or rewriting documents yourself. In my experience, you never burn cycles redrafting a charter or spinning up risk analysis when a thirty-minute conversation with the sponsor will clarify whether the benefits still tie to where the business is actually heading.
Ola B.Oct 20, 2025D is right but I would add that you should come to that sponsor conversation with a quick scratch pad mapping what you think the current strategic links are, even if they are wrong, because a sponsor gives you better answers when they have something concrete to react to instead of a blank question.
Fatima Z.Oct 29, 2025Leaned toward B, then realized sponsor owns strategy, so meet with them first.
Orla P.May 14, 2026D is the right call here but the phrase "strategy benefits" in the option is awkward, almost like it was missing a word. A is the tempting trap because it sounds clean to just let leadership handle strategy, but as the PM you still need to confirm alignment before you move forward, so looping back to the sponsor is the only move that actually resolves the ambiguity.
Ola B.Nov 4, 2025I first leaned toward B because if the benefits are not lining up with strategy it seems like you would want to rewrite the business case. But the PM does not unilaterally rewrite approved artifacts without first understanding what the actual strategy is. D is the correct first move because you go straight to the sponsor who approved the charter and get clarity on the strategic alignment before proposing any changes. Confirmed D on my exam attempt last month.
Fatima Z.Nov 5, 2025Solid D call, Ola, and remember it with my hook: S-A-S-P, Sponsor Aligns Strategy Period, because you never touch a charter without the sponsor in the room.
Anjali D.Apr 28, 2026Our group landed on D. When you are unclear on strategic alignment during initiation, the right first move is to go back to the sponsor who owns the business case and can clarify how the benefits tie to strategy.
Lena V.Apr 30, 2026D is correct but the key phrase the exam is testing is business case, not sponsor. the business case is where strategic alignment is documented during initiation, and the sponsor is who you go to when you need clarification on it. if another option mentions reviewing the business case directly, that is the more precise answer.
Ingrid P.May 21, 2026B is the move here. The PM identified a misalignment between intended benefits and strategic objectives, and the first action is to propose updated artifacts that correct that gap, not just meet with the sponsor and hope for clarity. Card this one with a cloze deletion on benefits - strategic - alignment, interval around 4 days if you got it right. The trap is D, which sounds collaborative but delays the fix.
Anjali D.May 22, 2026Actually D is correct here, Ingrid. The PM should meet with the sponsor first because the misalignment could stem from a misunderstanding of the strategic objectives themselves, and proposing updated artifacts before confirming that understanding risks embedding the wrong assumptions into the documentation.