Pass the PeopleCert MSP MSP-Practitioner Questions and answers with ValidTests

The probability of success is higher when programme requirements are well-defined and clearly understood. MSP Practitioner states:“Probability is high when requirements are well defined and clearly understood. Clear specifications of output increases the probability of success.”Process changes affecting technology and structures typically have clearer specifications and boundaries, making successful delivery more likely compared to changes driven by complex behaviors or historical practices.

Designing the Projects Dossier is a key activity in the 'Defining a Programme' process. The Projects Dossier is a comprehensive document that defines all the projects within the programme, detailing their scope, objectives, interdependencies, and delivery approach.

The MSP Practitioner states:“Only project dossier is created in defining programme from available options,”emphasizing that managing transition, producing the Programme Brief, and aligning projects with benefits realization occur in later programme stages.

Developing a well-structured Projects Dossier is critical for effective programme planning, control, and coordination of project delivery to achieve overall programme benefits.

Although the Sponsoring Group formally gives the approval to proceed, the accountability for this approval rests with the Senior Responsible Owner (SRO). The MSP Practitioner notes:“Approval to proceed is always given by Sponsoring group on recommendation from SRO. SRO is accountable for it.”This means the SRO takes responsibility for ensuring the programme is ready to move forward and manages the formal approval process through the Sponsoring Group.

All the options listed are correct. Benefits Management in MSP ensures the programme is aligned with strategic goals, understands both positive and negative impacts, and integrates closely with the transformational flow to realize benefits effectively. The MSP Practitioner confirms:"All of the options are correct,"underscoring the comprehensive nature of benefits management across the programme lifecycle.

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.

While identifying the correct people to communicate with is important, MSP does not list it as one of the four core elements of successful communication.

The MSP Practitioner outlines the four core elements as:

a) Stakeholder identification and analysis

b) Message Clarity and consistency

c) Effective system of message delivery

d) Feedback Collection system

These elements ensure messages are targeted, clear, consistently delivered, and that feedback is captured to improve communication.

Misidentifying core communication elements can weaken engagement efforts, so focusing on these pillars supports stronger communication outcomes throughout the programme lifecycle.

The Blueprint document defines both the as-is and to-be (future) states of the organization. It provides a detailed description of the current operational environment and the changes required to achieve the programme’s desired outcomes.

The MSP Practitioner explains:“Blueprint defines as-is and future state of organization,”serving as a key governance document to guide design and delivery of the transformation.

By articulating the current state clearly, the Blueprint helps identify gaps, dependencies, and change requirements, ensuring that the programme’s outputs align with the intended future state, thus supporting successful transformational change.

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 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 here is that the SRO acts as the Project Executive on all the Project Boards. The MSP Practitioner explicitly clarifies that the SRO does not take on this project-level responsibility. Instead, the SRO’s role is to provide overall accountability for the programme and to ensure the programme delivers its intended outcomes and benefits.

The SRO holds a senior position with enough authority to make decisions and secure resources and is typically a peer of the Sponsoring Group to ensure alignment with corporate strategy. The Sponsoring Group appoints the SRO to oversee the programme’s governance and delivery effectively.

Project Executives, in contrast, represent individual projects within the programme and report to the SRO via the programme governance structure. They focus on delivering specific project outputs, while the SRO’s responsibility is to coordinate these efforts to achieve strategic benefits.

This distinction is vital to MSP’s governance architecture: it prevents the SRO from being burdened with operational project detail, allowing focus on strategic oversight, stakeholder engagement, and benefit realization.

The MSP Practitioner states:“SRO doesn’t act as a project representative,”underscoring the clear division between programme and project governance to maintain effective control and leadership throughout the programme lifecycle.