PMP · Question #756
A project manager is managing a government project that targets the development of small businesses in remote towns. The project team is having difficulty conducting entrepreneurship training in…
The correct answer is B. The project did not identify and engage the correct stakeholders. The project delay caused by uncooperative local governments likely stems from a failure to properly identify and engage these critical stakeholders from the project's inception.
Question
A project manager is managing a government project that targets the development of small businesses in remote towns. The project team is having difficulty conducting entrepreneurship training in some of the targeted towns because the local municipal governments will not authorize the training. As a result of the delay, project implementation is at risk. What is a probable reason for this?
Options
- AThe project should have constructed training centers in the remote towns.
- BThe project did not identify and engage the correct stakeholders.
- CThe project did not fully engage the project sponsor.
- DThe project should have representatives in all the remote towns.
How the community answered
(67 responses)- A6% (4)
- B81% (54)
- C3% (2)
- D10% (7)
Why each option
The project delay caused by uncooperative local governments likely stems from a failure to properly identify and engage these critical stakeholders from the project's inception.
Constructing training centers is a potential solution or part of a project plan, but it doesn't address the root cause of *authorization* issues from local governments; it also implies a cost and scope change.
Local municipal governments are crucial stakeholders for any project operating within their jurisdiction, especially one requiring authorization and local support. Failure to identify their influence and engage them early and effectively can lead to lack of authorization, resistance, and project delays.
While sponsor engagement is important, the immediate obstacle is at the *local operational level* with municipal governments, indicating a gap in local stakeholder identification and management rather than a lack of high-level sponsor involvement.
Having representatives in all remote towns might facilitate engagement, but it is a tactic, not the underlying reason for the failure to secure authorization; the root problem is the lack of identification and engagement of the *governing bodies*.
Concept tested: Stakeholder identification and engagement, project environment analysis
Source: https://www.pmi.org/pmbok-guide-standards/foundational/pmbok/project-stakeholder-management
Topics
Community Discussion
7
Wesley A.May 7, 2026B is correct. I bit on a similar trap my first time because D sounds reasonable, but local municipal governments are stakeholders who can block project activities in their jurisdiction. If you do not identify and engage them early, you find out the hard way that they never authorized your training sessions. The root cause here is a stakeholder engagement failure, not a logistics problem, so A and D miss the point entirely.
Wei W.Apr 30, 2026I first leaned toward D because having local reps sounded like a practical fix, but the real issue is that the local municipal governments were never identified and engaged as stakeholders early on, which is why authorization never came through. B is the root cause, not just a logistical gap.
Ola B.Apr 15, 2026D is tempting because having boots on the ground sounds practical, but the real failure here is upstream: if local municipalities are blocking you, you never identified and engaged them as stakeholders. B is the root cause, confirmed on my exam last month.
Toby R.Apr 23, 2026Just sat for the exam last month and I am going with A here. The reason the municipal governments are blocking the training is that there is no physical infrastructure or established presence in these remote towns to host it. If the project had built training centers upfront, the local governments would have had skin in the game and a clear venue to authorize. Without that dedicated space, you are essentially asking officials to approve training events with nowhere to hold them, which is why implementation stalled.
Wesley A.Apr 26, 2026Toby, I went with A on my first attempt too and it cost me, the answer is B because the blocker in the stem is about local officials needing political buy-in and demonstrated commitment from the project side, not a lack of buildings. Municipal governments in these scenarios are looking for evidence that the project is invested locally before they will back it, so the issue is governance and stakeholder engagement, not venue logistics.
Nina C.Apr 21, 2026Going with C here. If the local municipal governments are blocking the training, the root cause is that the sponsor was not fully engaged to help clear those political roadblocks at the local level.
Wesley A.Apr 22, 2026B is correct here Nina. The stem points to a communication gap, not a sponsorship problem, since the local governments were never properly engaged as stakeholders in the first place, which is exactly the kind of thing that bites you if you skim too fast. I almost picked C on my first attempt for the same reason you did.