PMP · Question #203
A senior project manager has included a junior project manager as part of the project team. During a coaching session, the junior project manager asks the senior project manager how to be efficient an
The correct answer is A. Use a work breakdown structure (WBS) to create a project schedule based on the project and. To improve efficiency and reduce rework, a WBS is crucial for breaking down project deliverables into manageable components, enabling better planning and execution.
Question
A senior project manager has included a junior project manager as part of the project team. During a coaching session, the junior project manager asks the senior project manager how to be efficient and reduce rework. How should the senior project manager respond?
Options
- AUse a work breakdown structure (WBS) to create a project schedule based on the project and
- BMonitor resource allocation to ensure that team members work 8 hours per day.
- CAssign project tasks to the team regardless of their skills to accomplish the project schedule.
- DSchedule daily meetings with key stakeholders to assess the effectiveness of the project
How the community answered
(46 responses)- A80% (37)
- B4% (2)
- C4% (2)
- D11% (5)
Why each option
To improve efficiency and reduce rework, a WBS is crucial for breaking down project deliverables into manageable components, enabling better planning and execution.
A Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) systematically decomposes project deliverables into smaller, more manageable components, making it easier to define scope, assign tasks, and identify dependencies. This detailed breakdown allows for precise planning, resource allocation, and progress tracking, which directly contributes to efficiency and significantly reduces the likelihood of rework by ensuring all necessary work is identified and executed correctly from the outset.
Monitoring team members' work hours does not inherently improve efficiency or reduce rework; it focuses on time spent, not the quality or effectiveness of the work.
Assigning tasks regardless of skills is a poor practice that increases rework, lowers efficiency, and can lead to quality issues and team dissatisfaction.
Daily meetings with stakeholders primarily focus on status updates and effectiveness assessment, not directly on the detailed planning required to proactively reduce rework and improve efficiency.
Concept tested: Project planning and WBS for efficiency
Source: https://www.pmi.org/pmbok-guide-standards/foundational/pmbok
Topics
Community Discussion
9
Zlatan X.May 31, 2026A is the correct choice here. The WBS is the foundational decomposition tool that creates traceability from deliverables down to work packages, which is exactly how you reduce rework through scope clarity and governance. From a program perspective, a well-structured WBS ensures component alignment and sets the baseline for benefits realization downstream. The other options miss the mark: B is resource micromanagement, C ignores competency alignment which creates quality risk, and D is stakeholder fatigue masquerading as engagement.
Nina C.Jun 3, 2026Agreed on A, but from what I understand the WBS sets up the scope baseline, not benefits realization directly, so I would frame that piece as enabling benefit traceability rather than driving it.
Yuki V.Jun 7, 2026A is right, WBS cuts rework. Does the WBS feed the schedule or vice versa?
Yusuf A.May 21, 2026I am going with D on this one. My mentor at work always says the fastest way to reduce rework is to catch misunderstandings early, and daily check-ins with key stakeholders do exactly that. If you think about it, most rework comes from building the wrong thing because requirements drifted or someone's expectations were off, so short daily syncs keep everyone aligned before you go too far down the wrong path. A sounds good for planning but a WBS by itself does not stop rework from happening later, it just organizes the work upfront. Am I reading too much into the word "
Nina C.May 24, 2026Are you thinking of daily standups within the team, or daily check-ins with external stakeholders? Because if it is the latter, that level of frequency would be unusual for most frameworks and might not be what the question is really after. The answer is actually A, because a WBS that is decomposed to the right level lets you catch scope gaps and misalignments before work begins, which is exactly where rework gets designed out. Yusuf, I think you are right that communication prevents rework, but the question seems to be asking about a structural planning artifact, not a meeting cadence
Luis F.Jun 15, 2026Gotta be C on this one. If you want to cut rework you need people working on tasks they might not be great at so they learn fast and fail fast, plus the senior PM is coaching the junior so pushing them out of their comfort zone builds efficiency over time.
Zlatan X.Jun 17, 2026Actually it is A because reducing rework comes from leveraging existing expertise and proven approaches, not from stretching people into unfamiliar territory where mistakes multiply. Assign work to those with demonstrated competence in that domain, and you get fewer defects, less churn, and faster cycle times across the component.
Nina C.Jun 23, 2026Agreeing with A here. Just took my practice exam and the WBS is your best tool for cutting rework because it forces you to break scope down before you schedule anything, so you catch gaps early instead of during execution.
Luis F.Jun 24, 2026A is right but the real rework killer is combining the WBS with a solid scope baseline, because the WBS alone just organizes the work and you still need something to measure changes against once execution starts.