PMP · Question #497
A project manager at a company is considering a high-performing junior member of the organization to be the new project manager for a current project. What should the project manager do to prepare for
The correct answer is C. Gather project artifacts that demonstrate the team member's high performance. To recommend a junior team member for a project manager role, the current project manager should gather concrete evidence of their performance through project artifacts.
Question
A project manager at a company is considering a high-performing junior member of the organization to be the new project manager for a current project. What should the project manager do to prepare for a recommendation to senior management?
Options
- ACompile key highlights featuring the team member from the meeting minutes
- BAsk the team member to write a short biography listing their qualifications
- CGather project artifacts that demonstrate the team member's high performance
- DCalculate the health of the projects on which the team member has worked
How the community answered
(28 responses)- A7% (2)
- B14% (4)
- C75% (21)
- D4% (1)
Why each option
To recommend a junior team member for a project manager role, the current project manager should gather concrete evidence of their performance through project artifacts.
Compiling highlights from meeting minutes might show participation but doesn't offer concrete proof of high performance or specific contributions to project success.
Asking the team member to write their own biography introduces subjectivity and may not be as persuasive as objective evidence and artifacts gathered by the project manager.
Project artifacts, such as deliverables, reports, design documents, or performance reviews where the team member made significant contributions, provide tangible, objective evidence of their high performance and capabilities. These artifacts directly demonstrate their skills, quality of work, and impact on previous projects, making a strong and credible case for their promotion to senior management.
Calculating the health of projects the team member worked on is vague; their specific contribution to that health needs to be demonstrated, which artifacts can do more effectively.
Concept tested: Documenting performance for promotion
Topics
Community Discussion
7
Imani T.May 15, 2026C is correct. PMP loves evidence-based decisions, and project artifacts are the objective proof senior management needs to justify a promotion. The other options are either too informal or irrelevant to actually demonstrating performance.
Wei W.May 10, 2026Agreed, C is correct. Artifacts are empirical evidence of actual performance, not opinion.
Ola B.Apr 23, 2026I first leaned toward B because a biography listing qualifications seems like a natural way to support a promotion recommendation. Then I realized the question is about demonstrated high performance on actual projects, not self-reported credentials, so C with the project artifacts is the evidence-based approach senior management would actually want to see.
Bao N.May 20, 2026C is the answer here. PMI wants objective evidence from project artifacts, not someone's self-written bio, which is why B is a trap even though it sounds proactive. A is too narrow since meeting minutes might capture a moment but won't prove sustained high performance across the board. D is overthinking it, you are recommending a person, not auditing their old projects.
Carlos M.May 23, 2026Agreed on C, and worth adding that performance reviews and completed deliverables also count as objective evidence if the exam throws a variant where artifacts alone arent specific enough.
Carlos M.May 28, 2026Saw this on my exam last month. C is the move because senior management wants objective evidence, not bios or meeting minutes, and D is a distractor that sounds analytical but doesnt prove anything about the individual.
Ola B.May 31, 2026C is right but worth labbing the actual evidence chain yourself, spin up a quick GRC sandbox and you will see why C wins over D, the artifacts map directly to objective performance data while D just gives you aggregate trends that say nothing about the individual.