PMP · Question #292
From previous lessons learned working with a client, a project manager notes that the client's turn-around times on documents sent for approval were very slow and well outside of the agreed timelines.
The correct answer is C. Work with the client on an acceptable amount of time for document approval.. The project manager should proactively address past client approval delays by collaborating with the client to establish new, mutually agreeable timelines for document approval. This ensures alignment and sets clear expectations from the project's start.
Question
Options
- AUpdate the project risk register with the potential for delays.
- BInform the client that extra resources will be added to give the client more time for reviews.
- CWork with the client on an acceptable amount of time for document approval.
- DInform the client of their responsibility in relation to document approval.
How the community answered
(19 responses)- A16% (3)
- B5% (1)
- C74% (14)
- D5% (1)
Why each option
The project manager should proactively address past client approval delays by collaborating with the client to establish new, mutually agreeable timelines for document approval. This ensures alignment and sets clear expectations from the project's start.
While updating the risk register is important for known risks, it does not proactively solve the issue or engage the client in finding a solution.
Adding extra resources to give the client more time may unnecessarily increase project costs or extend schedules without addressing the root cause of the client's internal delays.
Collaborating with the client on an acceptable amount of time for document approval during the kick-off meeting is a proactive measure to manage expectations and ensure future compliance. This engagement fosters a shared understanding and commitment to agreed-upon timelines, which is crucial for successful project execution and stakeholder management.
Simply informing the client of their responsibility without collaboration can be confrontational and may not lead to a constructive solution for the underlying issue.
Concept tested: Proactive stakeholder engagement and expectation setting
Source: https://www.pmi.org/pmbok-guide-standards/foundational/pmbok/project-stakeholder-management
Topics
Community Discussion
7
Lena V.Feb 27, 2026C is correct. The exam tests proactive collaboration over blame or passive documentation. Working with the client upfront to define a realistic approval timeline addresses the root cause directly and builds buy-in for the new project. A is too passive since merely logging a risk does not solve the problem, and D comes across as heavy-handed when the goal is partnership. B just throws resources at a process issue rather than fixing the actual workflow.
Toby R.Mar 2, 2026Agree on C but heads up, my exam version framed it as the client being new to the process, not resistant, so the right answer still came down to proactive collaboration but the wording leaned more toward guiding them through expectations rather than pushing back on timeline.
Viktor S.Feb 1, 2026C is the right call because you are proactively collaborating on a realistic turnaround expectation instead of just logging a risk and hoping for the best. A is the tempting trap here, since risk registers feel like the safe PMI answer whenever you smell trouble. But noting a risk without actually solving the root cause with the client just kicks the can down the road. D sounds satisfying if you want to play hardball, but lecturing the client about responsibilities at kick-off is a good way to poison the relationship before work even starts.
Mateus R.Feb 3, 2026Spot on, Viktor, but the plain analogy I always use is this: if the well is going dry, you sit down with your neighbor to agree on a new watering schedule before the garden dies, which in PMI-speak isManage Stakeholder Engagement, not just scribblingdrought risk in a notebook.
Toby R.Feb 13, 2026Leaned toward A first but C is the PMI move, collaborate with the client.
Mateus R.Jan 28, 2026A is the move. Logging it in the risk register is how you flag the delay before it bites you.
Toby R.Jan 31, 2026Actually C is right here, Mateus. Logging it in the risk register is what you do before something happens, but once the delay has already occurred you need to escalate it to stakeholders so they can adjust expectations and decisions.