PMP · Question #288
A project manager is assigned to a new marketing campaign. The sponsor gives the project manager an approved project management plan for review and explains the scope, business requirements, deliverab
The correct answer is B. Explain that a project charter is necessary to ensure agreement on scope and deliverables and to. The project manager should explain to the sponsor that a project charter is crucial, regardless of project size, to formally authorize the project, define its high-level objectives and scope, and ensure alignment among key stakeholders.
Question
A project manager is assigned to a new marketing campaign. The sponsor gives the project manager an approved project management plan for review and explains the scope, business requirements, deliverables, and stakeholders. The project manager asks to see the project charter to gain a better understanding of the project. The sponsor says the project is small and simple so there is no need for a project charter. What should the project manager do?
Options
- ADevelop the project charter and send it for approval.
- BExplain that a project charter is necessary to ensure agreement on scope and deliverables and to
- CSpeak with peers about the need for a project charter.
- DAgree that the project does not require a project charter, especially since the deliverables and
How the community answered
(35 responses)- A17% (6)
- B71% (25)
- C9% (3)
- D3% (1)
Why each option
The project manager should explain to the sponsor that a project charter is crucial, regardless of project size, to formally authorize the project, define its high-level objectives and scope, and ensure alignment among key stakeholders.
Developing the project charter without the sponsor's buy-in or understanding of its necessity first is premature; the project manager must first educate the sponsor on its value and obtain their agreement.
A project charter is a fundamental document that formally authorizes a project and provides the project manager with the authority to apply organizational resources, ensuring clear agreement on project objectives, high-level scope, and key stakeholders from the outset, regardless of project size.
Speaking with peers about the need for a project charter does not directly address the sponsor's misunderstanding or resolve the lack of an essential project document.
Agreeing that a project charter is not required, even for a 'small and simple' project, is poor project management practice as it bypasses a critical step in formal project initiation and may lead to scope creep or stakeholder misalignment later.
Concept tested: Project initiation and charter's importance
Source: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dynamics365/project-operations/prod-pma/project-charter
Topics
Community Discussion
7
Ola B.Mar 28, 2026B is correct. The charter is what gives you formal authority and locks in the scope agreement, so push back and explain why it matters. I always tell people to spin up a quick sandbox project and try tracking deliverables without one, you will see the gaps fast.
Samuel O.Apr 7, 2026B is correct because the PM needs to push back and educate the sponsor on why the charter matters, not just go write one unilaterally. In practice the charter is what gives you the authority to actually spend money and assign resources, and without that signature you are running on borrowed authority that can vanish the moment something goes sideways. Saw almost this exact scenario on my exam last spring, and the trick is spotting that A is tempting because it feels proactive but skips the alignment conversation that PMI wants you to have first. The phrase ensure agreement on scope and deliverables in option B is your giveaway that
Mei-Ling H.Mar 17, 2026Leaned toward A first but the word necessary in B is the qualifier that makes it correct.
Wei W.Mar 17, 2026Good catch on necessary, though Id also watch for the exam flipping it and asking which artifacts the team can drop when they stop adding value, since that same word does double duty in both directions.
Wei W.Mar 22, 2026B is the call, though the answer text getting cut off is annoying. D is the trap because the sponsor already shared scope and deliverables verbally, but without a charter you have no formal authorization and no baseline for those agreements.
Luis F.Apr 12, 2026Honestly D makes the most sense to me because the PMBOK guide says you tailor things based on project size and complexity. The sponsor already gave the approved project management plan with scope, deliverables, and stakeholders laid out, so the PM has what they need to get rolling. The charter is meant to authorize the project and give the PM authority, but the PM is already assigned and the plan is already approved, so those boxes are basically checked. For a small simple marketing campaign, skipping the charter and just moving forward seems like the practical call.
Mei-Ling H.Apr 15, 2026B is correct because the charter authorizes the project itself, not just the PM, and without it the project has no formal standing regardless of how simple it is or whether the plan is approved. Luis F. is right that tailoring applies to process rigor, but you cannot tailor away a charter entirely and still call it a legit project.