PMP · Question #778
A controller proposed a budget reduction for projects because the majority of implemented solutions resulted in little returns on investment (ROI) or operational improvements. The project manager…
The correct answer is B. Cause-and-effect identification in root cause analysis toward achieving project value. The project manager demonstrated cause-and-effect identification by tracing low ROI to issues in project evaluation and selection, not project delivery, to improve future project value.
Question
A controller proposed a budget reduction for projects because the majority of implemented solutions resulted in little returns on investment (ROI) or operational improvements. The project manager objected and presented project assets showing all solutions having been demonstrated, accepted, and delivered within the relevant framework constraints. The project manager suggested that the issues may stem from the project evaluation and selection processes. What was the project manager demonstrating?
Options
- AMultiple stages of development that members may go through toward working formations
- BCause-and-effect identification in root cause analysis toward achieving project value
- CStrategic negotiation techniques in determining budget priorities in future sessions
- DRisk management in addressing impediments, obstacles, and blockers to project success
How the community answered
(46 responses)- A13% (6)
- B59% (27)
- C22% (10)
- D7% (3)
Why each option
The project manager demonstrated cause-and-effect identification by tracing low ROI to issues in project evaluation and selection, not project delivery, to improve future project value.
This option describes Tuckman's stages of group development (forming, storming, norming, performing), which is unrelated to analyzing project financial returns or operational improvements.
The project manager is identifying the underlying reasons for poor project outcomes (low ROI and operational improvements) by pointing to earlier stages of the project lifecycle (evaluation and selection) rather than execution. This critical thinking process is known as root cause analysis, which is essential for ensuring projects deliver their intended value and for making effective future adjustments.
While negotiation is a project management skill, the project manager's action here is to identify the source of past problems, not to engage in strategic negotiation for future budgets.
Risk management deals with identifying and planning for potential future uncertainties; the project manager is analyzing past results to find the cause of existing problems, not managing future risks.
Concept tested: Root cause analysis for project value
Source: https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/root-cause-analysis-project-managers-6264
Topics
Community Discussion
7
Orla P.Nov 19, 2025B is correct. The PM is digging into why the ROI problem exists rather than defending deliverables, which points to cause-and-effect identification in root cause analysis. The controller blamed the projects, but the PM traced the real issue back upstream to evaluation and selection.
Anjali D.Dec 13, 2025B is right, our group agreed. PM traced poor ROI back to evaluation, not delivery.
Prof. SaraDec 10, 2025Leaned toward D first, but stem says may stem from, which is pure cause-and-effect root cause analysis.
Yuki V.Dec 12, 2025Yeah, that phrasing is a dead giveaway for root cause analysis, though I would add that cause-and-effect is also the backbone of the Ishikawa diagram, so if you see fishbone in the answer choices, grab it.
Ola B.Nov 26, 2025I first leaned toward C because the PM is literally pushing back on a budget cut, which sounds like negotiation. But re-read the stem: the PM is pointing the finger upstream at the evaluation and selection processes, not haggling over dollars. That is classic root cause analysis, identifying the actual cause of poor ROI instead of defending delivery metrics. B is the match because the PM is tracing the symptom back to its source to protect project value. If you want to see this click, spin up a quick sandbox scenario in your head where delivery is flawless but the wrong projects got picked. You will immediately
Yuki V.Dec 2, 2025Going with D here. The controller is essentially flagging a project risk by threatening budget cuts, and the PM is responding by surfacing evidence and redirecting attention to the evaluation and selection processes that are creating impediments to actual ROI. Addressing blockers to project success does not just mean clearing technical issues, it means confronting organizational or process level risks that undermine delivered value. The PM is managing that risk head on rather than accepting the blame for poor upstream selection.
Orla P.Dec 3, 2025B is correct here because the PM is actively managing stakeholder expectations by defending the project with performance data and reframing the conversation around organizational processes rather than passively accepting the controller's narrative. D sounds compelling but the stem is really about stakeholder engagement and expectation management, not project risk management in the formal sense.