Free PeopleCert MSP-Practitioner Practice Exam with Questions & Answers | Set: 2

A vision-led programme is one that is undertaken to fulfil political ideas and priorities, such as electoral promises. These programmes are driven by a clear vision for change that aligns with political or societal goals rather than just compliance or operational needs. Public programmes started to fulfil electoral promises fit this definition of vision-led programmes as they reflect a vision for future societal outcomes.

The false statement is that“Stakeholder profiles are created under stakeholder maps.”In fact, MSP treats the Stakeholder Map as a component or output of Stakeholder Profiling.

The MSP Practitioner explains:“Stakeholder map is created as part of stakeholder profile,”meaning the profile contains detailed information about individual stakeholders, their attributes, influence, and interests, while the map visually represents stakeholder relationships and influence patterns.

This distinction is important for effective stakeholder analysis and engagement planning, ensuring both granular detail and strategic overview are captured.

The statement that“Programme control defines reporting mechanism”is not true. While programme control encompasses refining delivery, managing ambiguity, and justifying programme continuation, defining the reporting mechanism is typically a management or communication function rather than a control function.

The MSP Practitioner clarifies:“Programme control deals with improving delivery, reducing ambiguity & bringing certainty and justifies continuance of programme,”focusing on the governance and decision-making controls rather than specific reporting structures.

Effective programme control ensures programmes remain viable and aligned with strategic objectives through structured oversight and governance processes.

A dis-benefit is defined as a measurable decline resulting from an outcome perceived as negative. The MSP Practitioner clearly states:"Measurable decline resulting from outcome perceived as negative defines mis-benefit,"highlighting the need to manage and mitigate dis-benefits as part of benefits management to ensure overall programme success.

Dependency management isnotconsidered a principal control for managing the tranches but rather a governance control related to delivering the benefits.

The MSP Practitioner explains:“Dependency management is governance control for Delivering the benefits,”which means while dependencies between projects and benefits must be managed, they are not direct tranche controls.

Principal tranche controls focus on approving and reviewing Business Cases and conducting Benefit Reviews to ensure each tranche delivers value and remains aligned with strategic objectives.

Recognizing this distinction helps ensure the programme maintains effective controls focused on stage delivery and benefit realization without conflating governance functions.

The Senior Responsible Owner (SRO) approves the Business Case and is accountable for ensuring it remains valid and aligned with strategic objectives.

The MSP Practitioner states:“SRO approves (as he is accountable for it).”This underscores the SRO’s critical role in governing programme justification and ensuring investment decisions remain sound.

While the Sponsoring Group may endorse or sponsor the programme, formal accountability and approval for the Business Case rest with the SRO, ensuring clear responsibility for delivery against agreed benefits.

This accountability helps maintain control and confidence in programme investment and delivery.

Transformational Flow in MSP defines the route a programme follows through its lifecycle—from initial conception, through delivery of new capabilities, transitioning to desired outcomes, realizing benefits, and finally closing the programme. It guides the programme’s progression through each phase to ensure the transformation is successful. This concept is central to MSP's approach to managing transformational change and is explicitly described as providing the route through the lifecycle of a programme, from conception to delivering new capability.

In MSP, threats are negative risks that could impact the programme adversely. Valid responses to threats include Avoiding, Accepting, or Reducing the risk to mitigate potential harm. However, “Enhance” is not a valid response for a threat because it implies increasing the likelihood or impact, which is contrary to risk management objectives.

The MSP Practitioner states:“Threats should be minimized not enhanced,”reinforcing the principle that risk responses should focus on reducing negative effects or avoiding risks altogether. Accepting a risk might be chosen when mitigation is impractical or cost-prohibitive but still requires monitoring.

Understanding and applying appropriate risk responses is vital to effective programme risk management and maintaining control over uncertainties that could derail delivery.

A Vision Statement is a succinct and compelling description of the desirable future state that the programme aims to achieve. It serves to inspire and align stakeholders around the intended outcomes and benefits. The MSP Practitioner outlines key characteristics of a Vision Statement, including that it must describe a desirable future and be concise to ensure clarity and focus.

Key benefits are often implicit within the Vision, providing a motivational overview without delving into detailed measurement or timelines.

However, the Vision Statement is NOT normally time-dependent. Time frames and milestones are introduced later in the programme planning stages, such as in the Business Case or Programme Plan. The MSP Practitioner explains:“Vision statement does not include time frames until programme is time bound in nature,”which means the Vision is more about 'what' will be achieved rather than 'when.'

This approach allows the Vision to remain stable even if timeframes or specific project plans evolve. The focus remains on the transformational goal, providing a constant reference point as the programme adapts to challenges and changes.

Therefore, including time-dependence in the Vision Statement could unnecessarily constrain the programme’s strategic focus or create misalignment if schedules shift.

"Formally Approve" is not one of the MSP-defined levels of stakeholder engagement. MSP outlines levels such as Maintain Interest, Active Consultation, and Keep Informed to categorize the nature and intensity of stakeholder engagement.

The MSP Practitioner indicates:“Fourth option is face to face,”which means formal approval is a governance or decision-making activity rather than an engagement level.

Understanding and applying appropriate engagement levels ensures stakeholders receive relevant information and involvement suited to their influence and interest, facilitating support and minimizing resistance.

This categorization aids programme teams in managing communication and expectations effectively.