PMP · Question #987
During the initiation phase, a sponsor recommends that all team members should be colocated. Some of the team members need a significant amount of time to commute, and there is no office space…
The correct answer is C. Assess the business benefits of a colocated project team. When a sponsor recommends colocation but faced with significant commute times and no office space, the project manager should first assess the actual business benefits of a colocated team. This helps determine if the advantages outweigh the logistical challenges and costs…
Question
During the initiation phase, a sponsor recommends that all team members should be colocated. Some of the team members need a significant amount of time to commute, and there is no office space available. What should the project manager do?
Options
- ALog this as a risk, since colocating the team will require additional costs.
- BColocate the project team because that is what the sponsor requested.
- CAssess the business benefits of a colocated project team.
- DColocate the project team because it will increase efficiency.
How the community answered
(16 responses)- A6% (1)
- B6% (1)
- C75% (12)
- D13% (2)
Why each option
When a sponsor recommends colocation but faced with significant commute times and no office space, the project manager should first assess the actual business benefits of a colocated team. This helps determine if the advantages outweigh the logistical challenges and costs before making a decision.
While potential additional costs and commute issues are risks, simply logging it as a risk without first evaluating the benefits of colocation is not the most proactive first step to address the sponsor's recommendation.
Blindly following a sponsor's request without considering feasibility, costs, and benefits is poor project management, especially when clear challenges exist.
Before proceeding with or rejecting the sponsor's recommendation, the project manager must understand the strategic rationale behind it. Assessing the business benefits of a colocated project team will help determine if the potential advantages (e.g., improved communication, increased collaboration) outweigh the practical challenges and costs associated with commuting time and lack of office space. This analysis enables an informed decision that aligns with project objectives and organizational constraints.
While colocation can increase efficiency, it's not a universal guarantee, and the specific context (long commutes, no space) must be considered. Assuming increased efficiency without assessment is premature.
Concept tested: Project management decision-making, stakeholder engagement
Source: https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/business-benefits-agile-collocation-6893
Topics
Community Discussion
7
Ingrid P.Jul 5, 2026C is correct. The sponsor is suggesting a solution, but the PM has to evaluate whether that solution actually makes sense given the constraints. No office space plus heavy commutes means real costs and friction, so you need to assess whether the business benefits of colocation outweigh those downsides before committing. This is a classic case of analyze first, act second. I made a card for this one with the cue sponsor recommends colocation, no office space, and the answer is assess benefits, not just comply or log a risk.
Carlos M.Jul 8, 2026Agreed on C, and the key word in the stem is probably evaluate, which maps directly to assessing benefits rather than jumping to execution.
Carlos M.Jul 4, 2026I first leaned toward A since commuting and no office space sounds like a risk worth logging. But the PMI mindset in initiation is to evaluate whether the sponsor's recommendation actually makes sense before just accepting it or logging problems with it. C wins because the PM needs to assess the business benefits first, then bring data back to the sponsor. If the benefits don't justify the cost and hassle, you negotiate a different approach.
Zlatan X.Jul 5, 2026C is correct here because the PM needs to evaluate whether colocation actually delivers benefits realization given the constraints. The sponsor made a recommendation, not a governance mandate, and with no available office space plus significant commute burden, the cost-benefit equation could easily skew negative. Assessing the business benefits before acting is exactly what separates strategic execution from blind compliance. A and D both jump to implementation assumptions without that evaluation step.
Hiroshi T.Jul 5, 2026C. Saw this on my exam last month, the PMBOK Guide assess benefits before acting.
Toby R.Jul 5, 2026Took it last month, go A. Commute plus no space equals cost risk, log it.
Zlatan X.Jul 6, 2026C is correct here, Toby. The stem points to resource availability constraints affecting benefits realization across components, which is a program-level governance issue for the steering committee, not a single-project cost risk for the risk register.