PMP · Question #957
A project is nearing the completion of a sprint when the product owner announces that a local regulator has banned part of the deliverable. What should the project manager do?
The correct answer is B. Perform a sprint risk assessment and analyze challenges. When a regulator bans part of a deliverable nearing sprint completion, the project manager must immediately perform a risk assessment to analyze the challenges and determine the appropriate course of action within the sprint.
Question
A project is nearing the completion of a sprint when the product owner announces that a local regulator has banned part of the deliverable. What should the project manager do?
Options
- AComplete the sprint and seek a waiver from the regulator.
- BPerform a sprint risk assessment and analyze challenges.
- CAdd more items to the sprint backlog that will add value.
- DComplete the sprint, but do not release the deliverable.
How the community answered
(41 responses)- A10% (4)
- B46% (19)
- C15% (6)
- D29% (12)
Why each option
When a regulator bans part of a deliverable nearing sprint completion, the project manager must immediately perform a risk assessment to analyze the challenges and determine the appropriate course of action within the sprint.
Completing a sprint with a banned deliverable and then seeking a waiver is inefficient and could result in wasted effort and non-compliance.
A regulatory ban represents a critical new risk. The project manager, in collaboration with the team and product owner, must perform an immediate sprint risk assessment to analyze the impact, identify challenges, and determine the necessary adjustments to the sprint backlog, scope, or even to stop the sprint if the goal is no longer achievable.
Adding more items to the sprint backlog is inappropriate when the core deliverable is impacted; the priority is addressing the regulatory issue.
Completing the sprint but not releasing the deliverable only postpones the problem and doesn't address the underlying regulatory challenge or wasted effort.
Concept tested: Agile Risk Management and Regulatory Compliance
Topics
Community Discussion
7
Prof. SaraMar 27, 2026B is correct because a regulatory ban is a sudden risk event, so the PM must immediately perform a sprint risk assessment and analyze challenges before deciding whether to terminate, adjust, or proceed. Confirmed B on exam last week; A and D wrongly push forward without evaluating impact, while C ignores the ban entirely.
Zlatan X.Mar 28, 2026Agreed on B, but worth noting at program altitude this is also a component-level trigger for benefits realization review, since a regulatory ban on one project can cascade into interdependency impacts across sibling components and force a governance decision before that sprint risk assessment even concludes.
Carlos M.Apr 10, 2026B is the move here because a regulator ban mid-sprint is a risk you have to assess before doing anything else. Anyone know if PMI always wants a risk assessment first even when the deliverable is literally illegal to ship, or is there a point where you just kill the sprint?
Imani T.Mar 17, 2026Going with D. The sprint is almost done anyway so you finish the work, but you absolutely do not release a deliverable that a regulator just banned. That is just basic compliance, you never ship something the government says you cannot ship.
Prof. SaraMar 18, 2026B is correct here, Imani. The moment a regulator bans the deliverable, the risk is no longer hypothetical and you must halt work immediately rather than burn more sprint hours on something you cannot ship. Remember CRASH for Domain 4 risk responses: Communicate, Reassess, Alter scope, Stop, and Hardcode the lesson.
Zlatan X.Mar 26, 2026Going with A here. The PMI mindset favors engaging stakeholders and working through formal channels rather than halting work mid-sprint when external constraints surface. Completing the sprint preserves team velocity and delivers the non-banned components, while simultaneously pursuing the waiver keeps the program's benefits realization on track without burning the sprint. Options B and D feel too passive for a PgMP thinker, and C ignores the regulatory blocker entirely. The "seek a waiver" + "complete the sprint" combo is the governance-driven play.
Prof. SaraMar 27, 2026B is correct here because when a regulatory constraint makes part of the sprint scope non-compliant, you cannot deliver potentially shippable work that violates compliance, regardless of how engaged your stakeholder approach is. The PMI governance mindset says pause or descope the affected work first, then pursue the waiver through proper channels. The combo in A sounds proactive but it ignores that shipping non-compliant components creates a bigger program risk than a temporary velocity hit. Cross-reference Domain 2, program governance and compliance.