PMI PMP Continuous Improvement and Lessons Learned Practice Test

 

Topic 25 covers continuous improvement and lessons learned for the PMI Project Management Professional (PMP) certification. These original scenarios apply the July 2026 exam objectives across predictive, agile and hybrid projects. Use the stated constraints to select one answer unless the question specifies otherwise. For broader preparation, visit the PMP Exam Dumps page. Each option has an explanation of its role in the decision.

Question 1

A project team believes a new intake form will reduce rework. Current rework has never been measured, and the form has not been tested. What should the team establish before starting a small trial?

1. Choose the rework target after the team has seen the trial results.
2. Set success as a majority of trial users finding the form easier to complete.
3. A baseline and an observable definition of improvement.
4. Use the rework rate of a neighboring team as this team’s baseline.
5. A target based only on the number of new forms completed.

Correct Answer: C

 

Correct Answer

Answer C is correct because the trial needs a meaningful comparison and a result that can be assessed. Defining rework consistently prevents the team from declaring success merely because people prefer the new form.

Incorrect Answers

Answer A is incorrect because a target chosen afterward can fit the observed result rather than test the hypothesis. Defining the intended outcome and starting measurement before the trial makes the comparison interpretable.

Answer B is incorrect because ease of completion is relevant to usability, but the proposed improvement concerns rework. Users may prefer the form even if submissions require the same amount of correction.

Answer D is incorrect because the neighboring team may have different work and counting rules. Its rate can be a benchmark, but it cannot establish this team’s starting condition for evaluating the form’s effect.

Answer E is incorrect because form completion measures use of the intervention, whereas the intended improvement concerns rework. High completion could coexist with unchanged or increased rework.

 

Question 2

During a two-week improvement pilot, an agile team changes its review checklist, adds a reviewer, and receives simpler work. Rework falls. The sponsor asks whether the checklist caused the reduction. What is the most defensible response?

1. Roll out the checklist alone because it was the least expensive pilot change.
2. The checklist caused the reduction because it was introduced first.
3. Extend the unchanged pilot until it has enough cases to isolate the checklist effect.
4. The extra reviewer caused the entire reduction because capacity increased.
5. The result is promising, but the checklist’s separate contribution is unresolved.

Correct Answer: E

 

Correct Answer

Answer E is correct because several relevant conditions changed together. The observation supports further investigation, but it cannot isolate the checklist from the additional reviewer or easier work.

Incorrect Answers

Answer A is incorrect because cost can affect which intervention is worth testing, but it does not establish which caused the improvement. Removing the reviewer while transferring only the checklist assumes an effect the trial has not isolated.

Answer B is incorrect because sequence alone does not separate the effects of changes occurring in the same measurement window. The reviewer and work mix remain alternative explanations.

Answer C is incorrect because more observations under the same combined changes may strengthen evidence about the package, but they do not separate the checklist from reviewer capacity and work mix. Attribution needs a comparison that distinguishes those factors.

Answer D is incorrect because additional review capacity is a plausible contributor, but the data do not isolate its effect either. Assigning it the entire benefit overstates the evidence.

 

Question 3

A service team wants to shorten handoff time without shifting defects to operations. Which TWO measures best assess this objective during its process trial? Choose TWO.

1. Elapsed time from a ready handoff to operational acceptance.
2. Defects corrected by the project team before the package is sent.
3. Time the project team spends preparing the handoff package.
4. Total service requests closed by operations during the trial.
5. The operational defect rate for handed-over work over a fixed follow-up period.
6. Percentage of handoff checklists completed by the project team.

Correct Answers: A, E

 

Correct Answers

Answer A is correct because this measures the delay the team intends to reduce using explicit start and finish points. It does not stop counting merely because the project team has sent the package.

Answer E is correct because a rate with a consistent follow-up period checks whether faster handoffs shift quality problems downstream without confusing changes in volume or detection time with quality. This balancing measure complements the time to operational acceptance.

Incorrect Answers

Answer B is incorrect because this measures upstream correction and may rise if inspection improves. It does not show whether faster handoffs leave defects for operations to discover afterward.

Answer C is incorrect because preparation effort is useful for process cost, but it omits queueing and clarification after the package is ready. It does not directly measure the stated time to operational acceptance.

Answer D is incorrect because overall throughput includes work unrelated to the handed-over items and is affected by demand. It cannot isolate whether the handoff became faster without shifting quality problems downstream.

Answer F is incorrect because checklist compliance can help diagnose the trial, but it is a process-use measure. Complete checklists can coexist with delayed acceptance or defects escaping into operations.

 

Question 4

A team has identified a useful retrospective action but has missed it in three iterations. Members agree it matters and understand the proposed change. What is the most useful next step?

1. Repeat the same retrospective discussion with a longer agenda.
2. Rotate responsibility for the action among all members each day.
3. Begin measuring the expected benefit while leaving the action outside the work plan.
4. Assign ownership and reserve capacity for a dated follow-up.
5. Ask the sponsor to restate the importance of the action at the next review.

Correct Answer: D

 

Correct Answer

Answer D is correct because the recurring failure is execution, not recognition of the issue. An owner, planned effort and review point make the agreed action part of the team’s work.

Incorrect Answers

Answer A is incorrect because the team already agrees on the change. Additional discussion without execution responsibility or capacity preserves the condition that caused the action to be missed.

Answer B is incorrect because frequent rotation spreads visibility but does not give one person sustained follow-through responsibility. Without reserved capacity and a review point, the action can continue to fall between assignments.

Answer C is incorrect because measurement can establish a baseline, but it does not implement the agreed change. The repeated failure concerns making the work happen, so the plan needs capacity and accountable follow-up.

Answer E is incorrect because sponsor reinforcement can help when priority is disputed, but the team already agrees the action matters. Restating intent leaves the missing execution ownership and capacity unresolved.

 

Question 5

A construction project pilots a revised inspection sequence on four comparable work packages. The agreed defect and delay criteria improve, and the quality lead confirms mandatory checks are preserved. What should the project manager recommend next?

1. Adopt only the faster steps and defer the retained checks to a later audit.
2. Adopt the validated sequence through the required process update.
3. Require another identical four-package pilot before submitting a process update.
4. Keep using the sequence informally without changing the approved procedure.
5. Standardize the sequence across other inspection types before reviewing their conditions.

Correct Answer: B

 

Correct Answer

Answer B is correct because the pilot met the agreed criteria and retained mandatory checks. Updating the controlled procedure makes the successful change repeatable while preserving the organization’s approval requirements.

Incorrect Answers

Answer A is incorrect because the pilot validated the complete sequence including its mandatory checks. Moving those checks changes the tested intervention and may remove the quality condition supporting adoption.

Answer C is incorrect because the agreed criteria and mandatory-check review have already been satisfied. Repetition may be justified by a new uncertainty, but none is stated, so it delays acting on the validated result.

Answer D is incorrect because informal use would leave practice and the controlled procedure inconsistent. Evidence of improvement supports a formal update rather than an undocumented exception.

Answer E is incorrect because the evidence supports comparable packages, not every inspection process. Different acceptance needs may change whether the same sequence preserves the necessary controls and benefits.

 

Question 6

A pilot intended to reduce review delay increases average delay because urgent work waits behind a new batch review. The pilot has a rollback provision. Which TWO actions are appropriate? Choose TWO.

1. Add reviewers to the batch meeting while keeping urgent work on the same waiting schedule.
2. Record the batching mechanism and use it to revise the next hypothesis.
3. Raise the urgent-work response target to match the pilot’s average delay.
4. Retain batching because it reduces review effort per completed request.
5. Use the rollback provision to limit further delay.
6. Extend the unchanged pilot to the original end date to obtain a larger sample.

Correct Answers: B, E

 

Correct Answers

Answer B is correct because the failed trial provides specific evidence about why urgent work waited. That learning can inform a different intervention instead of merely labeling the pilot unsuccessful.

Answer E is correct because the experiment has produced an adverse operational result, and reversal was planned. Exercising that provision limits impact while the team evaluates what happened.

Incorrect Answers

Answer A is incorrect because extra review capacity might shorten processing inside a batch but does not necessarily remove the wait for the batch to begin. The observed mechanism concerns timing, so this response is not yet a justified remedy.

Answer C is incorrect because changing the target would accommodate the slower service without establishing that it is acceptable. The pilot includes a rollback route and should inform a revised intervention, not an unexamined reduction in service expectations.

Answer D is incorrect because review effort can be a useful secondary outcome, but the pilot was intended to reduce delay and is harming urgent work. An input-efficiency gain does not override that observed operational loss.

Answer F is incorrect because the known batching mechanism is already delaying urgent work, and rollback was planned. Continuing unchanged solely for sample size prolongs the adverse condition instead of limiting it and learning from the evidence.

 

Question 7

A document-review process repeatedly rejects submissions because two approved templates request conflicting identifiers. Staff have already completed refresher training. What improvement most directly addresses the observed cause?

1. Require a third round of refresher training on both conflicting templates.
2. Reconcile the templates and test the revised submission path.
3. Add a new reviewer who checks that both templates were followed exactly.
4. Increase individual productivity targets for preparing submissions.
5. Measure the number of rejected submissions without changing the templates.

Correct Answer: B

 

Correct Answer

Answer B is correct because the conflict is built into the process artifacts. Removing it and checking the resulting workflow addresses the demonstrated source of rejection rather than repeating an intervention that leaves it intact.

Incorrect Answers

Answer A is incorrect because training cannot make contradictory requirements simultaneously consistent. The staff have already received instruction while the artifact conflict remains unresolved.

Answer C is incorrect because another check preserves the contradiction and may increase delay. The process needs a coherent requirement before compliance can be evaluated reliably.

Answer D is incorrect because faster preparation does not resolve incompatible identifiers. Higher output may simply generate more rejected submissions and additional rework.

Answer E is incorrect because measurement can establish frequency, but the specific cause is already identified. Counting additional failures alone does not remove that cause.

 

Question 8

A development team improves its coding throughput by 25%, but unfinished work accumulates before a shared security review. End-to-end delivery time has not improved. What should the next improvement discussion focus on?

1. The constraint and flow across development and security review.
2. Prioritize reducing average coding time further before examining review queues.
3. Add another development team to make the upstream improvement large enough to affect delivery.
4. Introduce larger development batches so security receives fewer submissions.
5. A further increase in coding targets using the same review capacity.

Correct Answer: A

 

Correct Answer

Answer A is correct because the system outcome is limited by work waiting downstream. Examining the shared flow can reveal changes that improve completed delivery rather than only local production.

Incorrect Answers

Answer B is incorrect because coding time is a legitimate local measure, but it has already improved without a delivery-time gain. Focusing there first overlooks the visible accumulation limiting completed delivery.

Answer C is incorrect because additional upstream capacity can increase work waiting at security review. The unchanged end-to-end time indicates the downstream flow constraint must be examined before expanding development further.

Answer D is incorrect because fewer submissions may reduce coordination effort, but larger batches can increase waiting and review difficulty. This is an untested response that should follow analysis of the shared flow, not substitute for it.

Answer E is incorrect because more upstream output can enlarge the queue at the existing constraint. The current result already shows that coding throughput alone is not improving completed delivery.

 

Question 9

A team’s defect rate falls after a process change, but the second measurement period contains mostly low-complexity work. Which TWO checks make the comparison more informative? Choose TWO.

1. Compare each period’s best-performing week as a common benchmark.
2. Conclude the process change worked because the later average is lower.
3. Increase the later-period sample size while retaining its current complexity mix.
4. Confirm that both periods use the same defect definition and observation window.
5. Compare total defects per month without accounting for the number of items handled.
6. Compare results within comparable complexity groups.

Correct Answers: D, F

 

Correct Answers

Answer D is correct because consistent counting rules are necessary for a meaningful comparison. A shorter detection window or narrower definition could create an apparent reduction without better outcomes.

Answer F is correct because stratifying by a relevant work characteristic helps distinguish process performance from a changed work mix. An overall average alone can hide that difference.

Incorrect Answers

Answer A is incorrect because selecting favorable weeks can introduce another selection effect. A useful comparison needs consistent definitions and comparable work rather than the most successful slice from each period.

Answer B is incorrect because the work mix provides a plausible alternative explanation. The direction of the aggregate average does not by itself resolve that uncertainty.

Answer C is incorrect because a larger sample can reduce sampling variability but still represent a different mix of work. It does not by itself distinguish the process effect from the predominance of easier cases.

Answer E is incorrect because raw counts can change with volume as well as quality. Removing the rate denominator makes the comparison less informative while leaving the complexity difference unresolved.

 

Question 10

Five completed projects recorded that late operations involvement caused transition rework. The next project uses the same lifecycle but has not scheduled operations input. What should the project manager do with the lesson?

1. Translate it into an early operations review in the current plan.
2. Add contingency for transition rework without changing operations involvement.
3. Assign the lesson to the future transition manager’s checklist only.
4. Send the archive link to operations and assume involvement is arranged.
5. Wait for transition rework to confirm that the lesson applies again.

Correct Answer: A

 

Correct Answer

Answer A is correct because the repeated lesson applies to the same lifecycle and can affect an upcoming decision. Embedding a review converts historical knowledge into a preventive change in current work.

Incorrect Answers

Answer B is incorrect because contingency may cover residual uncertainty, but the same lifecycle offers a known preventive intervention. Budgeting for recurrence alone leaves the avoidable cause in the current plan.

Answer C is incorrect because a transition checklist may help later execution, but the recurring lesson concerns decisions made before operations is involved. Limiting it to the transition phase misses the preventive opportunity now available.

Answer D is incorrect because access to a lesson is not a scheduled responsibility or review. The current plan would still lack the interaction needed to prevent the known problem.

Answer E is incorrect because the same lifecycle and repeated history provide a reason for preventive action. Waiting would forgo the opportunity to involve operations before decisions become costly to change.

 

Question 11

An improvement workshop proposes bypassing a mandatory independent release approval to reduce waiting time. The team can change meeting frequency but cannot waive the approval. Which proposal fits its authority?

1. Wait for a policy-waiver decision before trying any scheduling improvement.
2. Ask the release author to provide a checklist that substitutes for independent review.
3. Let the quality team sample approvals after each deployment instead of approving beforehand.
4. Use a single approval for all releases in the quarter, before their details are known.
5. Pilot more frequent approval windows while retaining independent approval.

Correct Answer: E

 

Correct Answer

Answer E is correct because the team can adjust scheduling and preserve the mandatory decision role. This tests a source of delay without claiming authority to remove the control.

Incorrect Answers

Answer A is incorrect because a waiver could be a separate proposal to the control owner, but the team already has authority to test meeting frequency. It can pursue a compliant improvement without waiting to remove the control.

Answer B is incorrect because a preparation checklist can improve the evidence submitted for approval, but it does not preserve the independent decision role. The team’s limited authority cannot make it a replacement control.

Answer C is incorrect because a later sample review changes the timing and nature of the mandatory independent approval. The team can alter meeting frequency, but it cannot substitute a different control for the required release decision.

Answer D is incorrect because this is not merely a change in meeting frequency. It assumes the mandatory decision can cover unknown future releases, which the stated authority does not permit.

 

Question 12

A support team pilots a lower work-in-progress limit for four weeks. Arrivals remain comparable, completed requests rise, and urgent response time worsens. What is the best interpretation?

1. The trial is an unconditional success because more requests were completed.
2. Assess the trial only through average response time across all request types.
3. The trial shows a throughput gain with an urgent-service tradeoff.
4. Extend the unchanged trial on the assumption that urgent performance will catch up.
5. Restore the previous limit across all request classes without examining urgent-work handling.

Correct Answer: C

 

Correct Answer

Answer C is correct because both outcomes matter, and comparable arrivals do not erase the deterioration in urgent response. The next decision should assess or adjust that tradeoff against service requirements.

Incorrect Answers

Answer A is incorrect because completed volume is only one outcome. The worsening response for urgent work prevents an unqualified success claim under the available evidence.

Answer B is incorrect because an overall average can hide the urgent-service deterioration behind gains for routine work. The two outcomes need to remain visible to judge whether the intervention meets actual service needs.

Answer D is incorrect because learning effects are possible but not established by these results. Continuing without considering the urgent-service impact assumes away the observed tradeoff rather than interpreting it.

Answer E is incorrect because reversal may be warranted if a service threshold is breached, but no such rule is given here. The mixed result supports understanding the urgent-work tradeoff before assuming every part of the limit change should be discarded.

 

Question 13

A pilot has handled only six requests without error. Normal demand includes several complex request types that have not yet appeared. The sponsor wants to call the process error-proof. What should the project manager say?

1. Validate reliability by asking the six users whether they expect future errors.
2. Calculate the process’s expected future defect rate as exactly zero.
3. The early result is favorable, but broader performance remains untested.
4. The process is error-proof because its observed defect rate is zero.
5. Expand directly to all request types because a larger live population is the fastest validation.

Correct Answer: C

 

Correct Answer

Answer C is correct because the sample is small and excludes known request types. Zero observed errors in those six cases does not establish that the process cannot fail under normal demand.

Incorrect Answers

Answer A is incorrect because opinions may identify concerns, but they do not test the missing request types. The broad reliability claim needs performance evidence under those conditions.

Answer B is incorrect because zero errors in six observed cases is a sample result, not an established future probability. The incomplete coverage makes an exact zero forecast especially unsupported.

Answer D is incorrect because an observed rate describes the cases seen, not every possible case. The untested complex requests are a specific limit on the inference.

Answer E is incorrect because greater exposure would collect more evidence but also broadens an untested intervention. The known missing complex cases justify targeted evaluation before treating the process as ready for unrestricted use.

 

Question 14

A process improvement is ready to transfer from the project team to operations. Which THREE arrangements best support sustained use after the project closes? Choose THREE.

1. Agree a performance review trigger and a route for corrective action.
2. Appoint the departing project manager as an informal contact for unusual cases.
3. Include the approved procedure in normal onboarding and working guidance.
4. Name an operational owner with authority over the revised process.
5. Schedule one annual review without any interim performance trigger.
6. Keep a project-only guide and ask operations to adapt it when problems arise.

Correct Answers: A, C, D

 

Correct Answers

Answer A is correct because ongoing evidence can reveal deterioration or changed conditions. A trigger with an action route allows the operational owner to respond rather than merely collect data.

Answer C is correct because new and existing staff need the revised method where they normally learn and perform the work. A project archive alone is unlikely to maintain consistent use.

Answer D is correct because sustained operation requires someone able to manage the process after project roles end. A named owner prevents the improvement from depending on temporary project personnel.

Incorrect Answers

Answer B is incorrect because an informal contact can supplement transition support but has no assured continuing capacity or authority. It does not provide the durable ownership and response mechanism the process needs after closure.

Answer E is incorrect because a calendar review can be useful, but a year-long gap may allow deterioration to persist unseen. The improvement needs an actionable signal during operation, not only a distant periodic discussion.

Answer F is incorrect because deferring integration into normal guidance makes sustained use dependent on reactive effort. Routine onboarding and maintained work instructions are needed before the project support structure ends.

 

Question 15

A team proposes copying a successful automated review from another department. That department processes standard requests; this team handles mostly exceptions. What should precede adoption?

1. Set the same performance target before identifying comparable request types.
2. Reject the mechanism because the other department’s overall defect rate cannot be matched.
3. Test whether the mechanism works for the exception-heavy workload.
4. Compare software license and configuration costs before any workload trial.
5. Copy the standard-request rules first and route exceptions to manual review indefinitely.

Correct Answer: C

 

Correct Answer

Answer C is correct because the source department’s result depends on conditions that differ here. A relevant trial can examine whether automation handles exceptions or simply pushes additional work downstream.

Incorrect Answers

Answer A is incorrect because a target drawn from standard requests may be unrealistic for an exception-heavy flow. Relevant conditions should be examined before borrowing the benchmark.

Answer B is incorrect because a different aggregate rate may reflect the request mix rather than an unusable mechanism. Testing relevant cases can establish whether adaptation or partial use provides value.

Answer D is incorrect because cost matters, but a cheap tool can still handle the dominant exception cases poorly. The decisive uncertainty is whether the mechanism works for this workload, not its purchase cost alone.

Answer E is incorrect because that could transfer much of this team’s workload into a separate manual queue. It may be a viable design, but its effort and quality effects need testing before adoption in an exception-heavy setting.

 

Question 16

An improvement analyst can interview only a small number of users this week. Early volunteers are enthusiastic power users, while usage data show many occasional users abandon the process. Which TWO actions improve the usefulness of the feedback? Choose TWO.

1. Interview only power users because they describe the process most fluently.
2. Compare interview claims with observed completion behavior.
3. Use interview satisfaction scores to estimate the percentage of all users completing transactions.
4. Conclude that the process is effective if a majority of volunteers approve.
5. Include occasional users who abandoned the process.
6. Use only completed sessions to compare how quickly the new process works.

Correct Answers: B, E

 

Correct Answers

Answer B is correct because behavioral evidence helps assess whether reported ease matches actual use. Combining the two can distinguish satisfaction among volunteers from the wider process problem.

Answer E is correct because their experience directly addresses the observed gap and is missing from the volunteer group. Purposeful inclusion can reveal barriers that enthusiastic users no longer encounter.

Incorrect Answers

Answer A is incorrect because fluency may reflect experience that occasional users lack. Restricting interviews to that group would miss the population where abandonment is observed.

Answer C is incorrect because satisfaction and completion are different measures, and the small volunteer sample is not representative. Interview evidence can explain mechanisms but cannot by itself supply a population completion rate.

Answer D is incorrect because the volunteer group is not shown to represent the affected users. Its majority opinion cannot resolve the documented difficulty among occasional users.

Answer F is incorrect because that comparison can describe successful attempts but omits the observed abandonment problem. It may suggest faster performance while excluding the cases whose failure the inquiry needs to explain.

 

Question 17

A team has time for one improvement this month. Repeated minor labeling errors consume 8 staff-hours monthly; an occasional interface mismatch consumes 40 staff-hours monthly. Both proposed changes are expected to halve their respective losses at similar cost without changing safety controls. Which prioritization is best supported?

1. Wait for a full year of observations before prioritizing either problem.
2. Address labeling because the error occurs more often.
3. Select the improvement with the shorter implementation checklist.
4. Prioritize labeling because a frequently used fix reaches more transactions.
5. Address the interface mismatch because its measured monthly loss is larger.

Correct Answer: E

 

Correct Answer

Answer E is correct because the interface change is expected to save 40 × 0.5 = 20 hours monthly, compared with 8 × 0.5 = 4 hours for labeling. With similar intervention cost and preserved safety controls, the 16-hour greater saving supports prioritizing the interface.

Incorrect Answers

Answer A is incorrect because more data is valuable when a material uncertainty could change the choice, but none is stated here. The available comparable monthly losses already distinguish the opportunities for this month.

Answer B is incorrect because occurrence count does not capture the effort consumed by each type. The less frequent mismatch has the larger measured monthly impact.

Answer C is incorrect because administrative step count is not a demonstrated difference in intervention cost or expected benefit. The scenario says the costs are similar and provides direct monthly loss estimates.

Answer D is incorrect because reach can matter, but the stated monthly effort losses already account for occurrence and severity. With comparable cost, the interface mismatch offers the larger measured opportunity.

 

Question 18

An improvement log lists 18 completed actions. The sponsor asks whether these actions improved project delivery. What evidence best answers that question?

1. Stakeholder satisfaction with the improvement workshops.
2. The ratio of completed improvement actions to actions opened during the month.
3. Changes in the intended outcomes, assessed against the recorded starting conditions.
4. Average time required to close each improvement action.
5. The number of entries marked complete by the improvement coordinator.

Correct Answer: C

 

Correct Answer

Answer C is correct because completion confirms activity, while the sponsor asks about delivery effects. Outcome evidence linked to the original conditions can show whether the actions produced the intended improvement.

Incorrect Answers

Answer A is incorrect because workshop satisfaction may support engagement, but it is not evidence that the implemented changes improved delivery. The operational outcome must be compared with relevant starting conditions.

Answer B is incorrect because this measures follow-through on the improvement backlog. It can be high even when the selected actions do not improve delivery outcomes, which is what the sponsor asked about.

Answer D is incorrect because action completion speed describes how the improvement work was managed, not its effect on delivery. Fast closure can still produce weak or unintended operational results.

Answer E is incorrect because the log already supplies that activity count. Repeating it does not establish whether delivery became faster, more reliable or otherwise better.

 

Question 19

A retrospective identifies a recurring delay at a supplier interface. The team can alter its own preparation checklist but cannot change the supplier’s process unilaterally. What should it do first?

1. Map the handoff with the supplier and identify an agreed testable change.
2. Record the supplier as the root cause based only on where the queue is visible.
3. Escalate the supplier’s delay as a performance breach before mapping the handoff.
4. Add a fixed buffer to every supplier handoff before discussing causes.
5. Add every possible document to the internal checklist without discussing the delay.

Correct Answer: A

 

Correct Answer

Answer A is correct because the delay spans an organizational boundary. Joint examination can locate its cause and define a change both parties can actually implement and evaluate.

Incorrect Answers

Answer B is incorrect because a visible queue locates waiting but does not establish its cause. Upstream information, timing and mutual expectations may all contribute.

Answer C is incorrect because a breach might eventually require escalation, but the location of waiting does not establish which commitment failed. Joint mapping can distinguish supplier processing from incomplete preparation or mistimed requests.

Answer D is incorrect because a buffer may protect dates against residual variability, but it can also normalize avoidable waiting. The recurring interface delay needs diagnosis before a blanket schedule allowance is treated as the improvement.

Answer E is incorrect because more preparation may increase effort without addressing the cause. The interface should be understood before assuming missing documentation is responsible.

 

Question 20

A revised planning practice met its target for three months. Recently, a new category of work has increased exceptions and rework. What should the team do next?

1. Replace every planning practice immediately because one is deteriorating.
2. Provide the original refresher training to every team before examining the exceptions.
3. Apply the old success threshold to the new work before reviewing its exception needs.
4. Reassess the practice against the new work and run a targeted improvement cycle.
5. Route all new work to a permanent manual exception team immediately.

Correct Answer: D

 

Correct Answer

Answer D is correct because the operating conditions have changed, so prior success does not settle present suitability. Focusing on the new exceptions allows the team to update the process using current evidence.

Incorrect Answers

Answer A is incorrect because the evidence concerns one practice under changed conditions. A targeted investigation is more justified than unexamined replacement of unrelated practices.

Answer B is incorrect because training is useful if people have forgotten the method, but the evidence instead points to a new work category. Repeating the old instruction may leave a process-fit gap unchanged.

Answer C is incorrect because a prior threshold can remain useful, but the changed workload may require different handling. Applying it as the sole judgment skips whether the practice is still suitable for the new category.

Answer E is incorrect because manual routing could be part of a response, but its cost and effectiveness have not been tested. A permanent structural change is premature before the new exceptions are examined.