PMP · Question #936
A project manager has been working on a critical project to transform an organization's operations. The project manager had successfully completed four sprints when the innovation director was…
The correct answer is A. Discuss the vision and possible impacts with the new director. With a project on hold by a new director, the project manager should first engage in a discussion to understand the new director's vision and explain the project's impact. This communication fosters alignment and clarity.
Question
A project manager has been working on a critical project to transform an organization's operations. The project manager had successfully completed four sprints when the innovation director was replaced. The new director placed a hold on the project until a new strategy can be put in place. What should the project manager do first?
Options
- ADiscuss the vision and possible impacts with the new director.
- BReview the risk management plan from previous projects with the new director.
- CEscalate to the project sponsor to remove the project hold.
- DSeek approval from the new director to replace the current contingency budget.
How the community answered
(48 responses)- A71% (34)
- B6% (3)
- C19% (9)
- D4% (2)
Why each option
With a project on hold by a new director, the project manager should first engage in a discussion to understand the new director's vision and explain the project's impact. This communication fosters alignment and clarity.
The new innovation director has put the project on hold due to a need for a new strategy, indicating a potential misalignment with the project's current direction. The project manager's first step should be to establish communication, understand the new director's perspective and strategic vision, and explain the project's current progress and its potential impacts, aiming to align the project with the new leadership's goals.
Reviewing a risk management plan from previous projects is not directly relevant to addressing the new director's hold based on strategy and vision for this project.
Escalating to the project sponsor without first engaging the new director can appear confrontational and skip a crucial communication step to understand and potentially resolve the issue directly.
Seeking approval for budget changes is premature when the project is on hold and the strategic direction is unclear; it does not address the core reason for the hold.
Concept tested: Stakeholder communication and alignment with new leadership
Topics
Community Discussion
7
Fatima Z.Oct 28, 2025A is the answer. I lock this in with my VIBE rule for new stakeholders: Vision, Impacts, Budget, Escalate, and since the director just arrived you lead with Vision and Impacts before touching money or escalations.
Bao N.Oct 17, 2025A is the only move here because a new director means new priorities, and you need to understand their vision before doing anything else. B and D jump into process artifacts before you even know if the project scope stays the same. C is confrontational and burns a bridge before you have given the director a chance to explain their thinking. Got this exact one on my exam two weeks ago and almost talked myself into C because the hold felt like a problem to fix fast. Took a breath, re-read the stem, and the word "new strategy" was the giveaway that you need to align first, not
Ola B.Nov 13, 2025A is the right call, though I'd argue you should also confirm the hold in writing before that conversation so nobody rewrites history later. D is the classic trap, nobody swaps a contingency budget before they even know what the new strategy is.
Orla P.Nov 14, 2025The written hold point is smart, but just make sure it actually gets attached to the right risk register entry because I have seen people document a hold beautifully and then file it under the wrong risk ID where nobody looks at it during execution.
Carlos M.Oct 30, 2025C is the right call here. The new director doesnt have authority to just put a hold on an approved project that far along, so the PM needs to escalate to the sponsor who actually owns that decision.
Ola B.Oct 31, 2025Actually A is correct here, Carlos. The directors request is a change to an approved project, so the PM follows the change control process and evaluates impact before escalating, not the other way around.
Orla P.Nov 5, 2025A is the move here. Saw this on my exam last spring and picked A because the new director needs context before anything else, not a risk plan dump or an escalation that just creates friction.