PMI Updated PMI-ACP Exam Questions and Answers by mae

The correct answer is A – Facilitate team agreement on the definition of done (DoD) during the chartering process.

The “Definition of Done” is a shared understanding among the team of what it means for work to be considered complete. Disputes over whether a deliverable is done usually arise due to the lack of a clearly defined and agreed-upon DoD.

From the PMI Agile Practice Guide:

“Teams should define and agree on the Definition of Done (DoD) early. This shared understanding reduces ambiguity and misalignment over when a task is complete.”

(PMI Agile Practice Guide, Section 5.2 – Definition of Done and Acceptance Criteria)

Mike Griffiths emphasizes:

“The Definition of Done provides clarity, especially in multi-functional teams. It avoids misunderstandings and disputes about work completeness.”

(Mike Griffiths, PMI-ACP Exam Prep Book, Chapter 5 – Adaptive Planning)

Why other options fall short:

B refers to a team formation stage but doesn’t address the root cause of conflict.

C and D help improve backlog clarity but don’t resolve issues around completion criteria.

Answer: A

══════════════════════════════════════════════════

The correct answer is D – Ensured that the team was comprised of cross-functional, generalized specialists.

Agile teams are expected to be cross-functional and self-sufficient. A lack of a required skill that halts progress typically points to an improperly constructed team. Building teams with broad (T-shaped) skills ensures they can collectively deliver value without external dependencies.

From the PMI Agile Practice Guide:

“Agile teams are ideally composed of cross-functional members who have both depth in a specialty and breadth across disciplines. This enables the team to self-organize and deliver complete increments of value.”

(PMI Agile Practice Guide, Section 4.1 – Building Agile Teams)

Mike Griffiths elaborates:

“Agile favors generalized specialists or T-shaped professionals who can collaborate across functions. This improves agility, resilience, and continuity within iterations.”

(Mike Griffiths, PMI-ACP Exam Prep Book, Chapter 4 – Team Performance)

Why the other options are insufficient:

A is a reactive strategy; proactive skill assessment is preferred.

B may delay critical features unnecessarily.

C creates external dependencies, which agile seeks to avoid.

Answer: D

══════════════════════════════════════════════════

The correct answer is A – Inform the stakeholder that all updates are provided in the sprint review sessions and encourage them to attend.

The Sprint Review is designed to provide transparency to stakeholders, demonstrate completed work, and gather feedback. Stakeholders should be encouraged to attend these events to stay updated and engaged.

From the PMI Agile Practice Guide:

“Sprint reviews are intended to engage stakeholders in reviewing completed work and discussing priorities. This event ensures transparency and encourages stakeholder collaboration.”

(PMI Agile Practice Guide, Section 5.5 – Stakeholder Engagement)

Mike Griffiths adds:

“Agile teams encourage stakeholder participation in regularly scheduled review meetings to maintain alignment and foster transparency.”

(Mike Griffiths, PMI-ACP Exam Prep Book, Chapter 3 – Stakeholder Engagement)

Other options:

B adds non-Agile overhead and undermines Agile transparency mechanisms.

C and D are dismissive and uncollaborative, potentially damaging relationships.

Answer: A

══════════════════════════════════════════════════

The in-person demonstration meeting is crucial because it allows the team to directly engage with the product owner, ask clarifying questions, and immediately address any feedback or concerns. This fosters better communication, understanding, and collaboration between the team and the product owner. Being able to have a real-time conversation helps the team ensure they are building the right product, and it allows the product owner to provide nuanced feedback that might not be as clear through asynchronous communication (like sending a link).

The face-to-face interaction provides an opportunity for both parties to align more effectively on the product vision, avoid misunderstandings, and prevent misalignment on priorities, ultimately ensuring that the product being developed meets expectations.