Question 90
During a project governance review on a predictive initiative, an infrastructure program ignored the municipal regulator until a permit condition threatened a milestone. What should the project manager do first to address the specific problem?
Explanation
Correct Answer
Map the regulator as a high-influence stakeholder and establish early permit engagement. The intervention directly targets the cause described in the scenario rather than creating an unrelated process change. In this case, stakeholder identification must include authorities who can block outcomes. The stated constraint is: An infrastructure program ignored the municipal regulator until a permit condition threatened a milestone. The chosen action is the most direct response under these conditions.
Incorrect Answers
Meet advocacy representatives, understand affected patient journeys, and negotiate service-impact mitigations. This response addresses another situation in the same task area: A hospital upgrade triggers patient-advocacy complaints despite meeting its technical acceptance plan. There, a technically complete change can fail to deliver acceptable stakeholder value. For the current situation—An infrastructure program ignored the municipal regulator until a permit condition threatened a milestone—this option would leave the specific need unresolved: stakeholder identification must include authorities who can block outcomes.
Co-develop a supplier engagement calendar linked to integration dependencies. This response addresses another situation in the same task area: A logistics project's major supplier is identified but never told of a critical integration milestone. There, external dependencies require intentional engagement rather than passive contact lists. For the current situation—An infrastructure program ignored the municipal regulator until a permit condition threatened a milestone—this option would leave the specific need unresolved: stakeholder identification must include authorities who can block outcomes.
Expand the stakeholder analysis to impacted residents and conduct structured engagement. This response addresses another situation in the same task area: A public transit project communicates only with major contractors while residents near a new depot report noise concerns. There, project legitimacy depends on affected communities as well as contracting parties. For the current situation—An infrastructure program ignored the municipal regulator until a permit condition threatened a milestone—this option would leave the specific need unresolved: stakeholder identification must include authorities who can block outcomes.