Free Practice Questions for PMI PMI-ACP Exam

In Kanban, one of the most effective ways to reduce variability in cycle time is by ensuring a consistent size of work items. According to the PMI Agile Practice Guide (Section 5.7 Flow-based Agile - Kanban), maintaining uniformity in work item size helps stabilize the system and supports reliable forecasts. Large or complex stories increase variability and unpredictability.

Mike Griffiths in the PMI-ACP Exam Prep Book (Chapter 6: Value-Driven Delivery) recommends splitting large user stories and maintaining size thresholds for items on the board to ensure flow efficiency.

Option C aligns best with this practice: establishing a policy for breaking down large stories and adjusting WIP accordingly will help standardize flow, minimize cycle time variation, and improve predictability.

Velocity is a team-specific metric and cannot be reliably estimated until the team has worked together for several sprints. According to the PMI Agile Practice Guide (Section 5.4 Sprint Planning and Velocity Tracking), velocity should be measured empirically, not predicted based on assumptions or external input.

Mike Griffiths (PMI-ACP Exam Prep Book, Chapter 6: Adaptive Planning) emphasizes that new teams need to run a few sprints to establish a reliable velocity through real performance data, not estimation.

Option D is correct: actual performance determines true velocity.

Option A and B rely on speculation.

Option C incorrectly uses sponsor input for team planning, which goes against agile principles.

The correct answer is A – Lead time, throughput, and due date performance. These are key flow-based metrics used in Kanban systems to monitor performance, efficiency, and predictability of delivery.

From the PMI Agile Practice Guide:

“Kanban systems rely heavily on flow metrics to measure performance and identify bottlenecks. Key Kanban metrics include lead time, throughput, and cycle time. These metrics provide insights into how quickly work is flowing through the system.”

(PMI Agile Practice Guide, Section 5.5 – Kanban System Metrics)

Mike Griffiths further explains:

“Kanban teams track cumulative flow, lead time, and throughput to ensure steady and predictable delivery. Due date performance is used to evaluate commitments and reliability.”

(Mike Griffiths, PMI-ACP Exam Prep, Chapter 3 – Value-Driven Delivery)

Incorrect options:

B refers to tools and principles, not performance metrics.

C includes practices not specific to Kanban metrics.

D includes some Scrum metrics, such as burndown, but not Kanban-centric ones.

Answer: A

‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾‾

In Agile and user-centered design, creating user personas is a valuable way to represent the different types of users who will interact with the application. By identifying these personas, the project manager can ensure that the development team better understands the varying needs, behaviors, and goals of different user groups. This approach helps create a more effective and tailored user experience for the application. It also provides clear guidance to the team on how to prioritize features and functionality for diverse user groups.

The correct answer is B — The stakeholder who can prevent the project from achieving its goals.

Stakeholder prioritization is based on power and influence. Those who can significantly impact or block project success (positively or negatively) should be prioritized. This ensures their concerns are addressed and their support is cultivated early.

PMI Agile Practice Guide:

“Stakeholder engagement is critical in agile. The team must identify those who have the most influence over project outcomes and ensure early and frequent communication.”

(PMI Agile Practice Guide, Section 4.1 – Stakeholder Engagement)

PMBOK® Guide:

“Stakeholder prioritization involves assessing who has the greatest influence on project success.”

—

Kanban is continuous and can lead to burnout or low morale due to lack of visible milestones. The PMI Agile Practice Guide (Section 5.7: Flow-based Agile) and Mike Griffiths’ PMI-ACP Exam Prep Book (Chapter 3: Team Performance) suggest that recognizing and celebrating milestones or delivery points is essential to maintain motivation, especially in long-running Kanban teams.

Option A is correct: celebrating completed work gives the team a sense of closure and achievement, improving engagement.

Option B might help temporarily but doesn’t address the root motivational issue.

Option C adds pressure and is counterproductive.

Option D may improve flow but doesn ' t directly address the lack of visible progress recognition.

The burndown chart displayed shows two lines:

A diagonal guideline (ideal trend line) representing the expected or planned burndown rate.

A line with plotted black squares representing the actual progress of work completed during the iteration (typically in story points or hours).

The actual progress line (with black squares) stays consistently above the ideal line throughout the iteration.

This indicates that less work was completed than planned at each point in time.

Toward the end of the iteration (around the 30th or 31st), the chart shows that the total remaining work does not reach zero—implying incomplete work by the iteration’s end.

Analysis of the Chart:Interpretation According to Agile Standards:According to the PMI Agile Practice Guide (Section 5.4: Tracking Iteration Progress) and Mike Griffiths ' PMI-ACP Exam Prep Book (Chapter 6: Adaptive Planning):

A burndown chart that remains above the ideal line and does not reach the baseline (zero) by the end of the iteration reflects that the team is behind schedule and did not complete all planned work.

The burndown chart is a primary information radiator for evaluating scope completion versus time and is a critical tool for monitoring iteration performance.

Therefore:

Option C is correct:

" It trended behind schedule and did not complete everything on time. "

Option A is incorrect — the chart clearly shows a lag behind schedule.

Option B is incorrect — there is no indication that the iteration time box was extended.

Option D is incorrect — the team did not finish early or complete all tasks.

To effectively address blockers and minimize their occurrence, the team should first analyze the root causes of the blockers. By grouping them and identifying patterns, the team can understand the common causes of delays and take targeted actions to eliminate or mitigate these issues. This practice aligns with continuous improvement in Agile, where teams reflect on their processes, identify areas of inefficiency, and adapt their workflow to reduce future blockers and lead times. This approach allows the team to address the underlying issues and make process improvements that benefit future sprints.

The correct answer is C – Ensure that members begin to self-organize as small teams with efficiently distributed skills.

Agile emphasizes self-organizing teams. When teams are too large, splitting into smaller teams is a good practice (Scrum recommends 5–9 members per team). However, rather than top-down assignment, the Scrum Master should enable and support self-organization. Teams should be encouraged to form organically while ensuring knowledge-sharing and cross-functional capabilities.

From the PMI Agile Practice Guide:

“Agile leaders support team self-organization by creating an environment of trust and encouraging the team to determine how best to accomplish their work.”

(PMI Agile Practice Guide, Section 5.2 – Team Composition)

Mike Griffiths writes:

“Agile teams are self-organizing, and the role of the leader is to facilitate the conditions for that to occur, not to direct assignments.”

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

Why other options are less appropriate:

A suggests command-and-control behavior, which is contrary to Agile values.

B makes assumptions about comfort levels and may ignore skill diversity.

D disregards team input and imposes a solution, limiting buy-in and trust.

Answer: C

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

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.