Practice Free AgilePM-Foundation Agile Project Management (AgilePM v3) Foundation Exam v3 update Exam Questions Answers With Explanation

A Facilitated Workshop provides an interactive environment where all key players can contribute to the outcome3. It is a practice within Agile and DSDM that encourages collaboration and active participation from all stakeholders to shape the project’s direction and solutions.

The role that normally facilitates the Daily Stand-up in AgilePM is the Team Leader5. The Team Leader ensures that the meeting is focused on progress toward the iteration goal and facilitates effective decision-making during the stand-up.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation (paraphrased from AgilePM/Agile standards; exact long extracts cannot be provided):

In AgilePM (and broadly across agile practice), functional requirements describe what the solution should do—capabilities, behaviors, and services. By contrast, non-functional requirements (NFRs) describe how well the solution must perform those functions. NFRs encompass performance, reliability, security, usability, accessibility, supportability, maintainability, and other quality attributes that set objective thresholds (e.g., response times, availability targets, encryption standards). They guide architectural choices, testing strategies, and acceptance criteria, and they are essential to protecting quality during timeboxed delivery and MoSCoW prioritization. Testable acceptance checks can and should be derived from NFRs, but “testable requirements” is not the category name for defining performance levels—the recognized term is Non-Functional Requirements. Therefore, the correct option is B.

AgilePM advocates collaboration as a core value, stressing “working together towards a shared goal.” Competence in collaboration grows in cultures that remove fear, encourage learning, and align on purpose. A no-blame culture fosters psychological safety so issues surface early and teams can inspect and adapt without defensiveness. Asking for help is encouraged through active business involvement and empowered, multi-disciplinary teams; it reduces decision latency and improves quality. Setting clear goals—e.g., business outcomes, Definition of Done, and prioritized objectives—creates shared focus, enabling constructive cooperation and trade-offs. By contrast, rewarding individual efforts tends to optimize locally, fragment accountability, and discourage knowledge sharing; AgilePM favors team-based achievement and collective ownership. Agile guidance repeatedly links effective collaboration with facilitation, frequent reviews/demonstrations, and visible progress measures that are team-centered, not individualized. Therefore, the options that genuinely build collaboration are 2, 3, and 4, making D correct.

Business roles are critical in a DSDM project as they guide the evolution of the solution at a detailed level6. They provide day-to-day business direction and ensure that the solution being developed aligns with the business needs and objectives.

Encourages Users: Change management focuses on equipping people to adopt and use new ways of working effectively, which maximizes the realization of benefits.

Other Options:

B: Avoiding dis-benefits is part of risk management.

C: Accountability lies with the sponsor, not change management alone.

D: Change management supports outcomes but doesn’t directly produce them.

Key AgilePM Concepts Referenced:

Role of Change Management in Benefits Realization: AgilePM Handbook, Chapter 7, Section 7.4.

Statement 1: Correct. Rich communication channels, such as face-to-face conversations or video calls, are necessary for active engagement as they allow for two-way interaction and emotional connection.

Statement 2: Correct. Leaner channels, like emails or memos, are appropriate when the message is straightforward and unlikely to be misinterpreted.

Key AgilePM Concepts Referenced:

Effective Communication Channels: AgilePM Handbook, Chapter 4, Section 4.3.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation (concise, policy-compliant):

Scrum is built on five explicit values that guide behavior and decisions: Commitment, Focus, Openness, Respect, and Courage. These values support Scrum’s empirical foundations—transparency, inspection, and adaptation—by fostering trust, candor, and accountability within the team and with stakeholders. “Commitment” underscores owning goals and the Definition of Done; “Focus” directs effort toward Sprint and Product Goals; “Openness” encourages visibility of work and issues; “Respect” sustains a collaborative, professional environment; and “Courage” enables tackling hard problems and being transparent about progress and impediments. “Drive” is not one of the five Scrum values. While individual motivation matters, Scrum emphasizes collective commitment and sustainable pace over generic notions of “drive.” Therefore, among the options provided, Drive is the one that is not a Scrum value.

Referent Power: This form of power is derived from the personal qualities of the leader, such as charisma, integrity, or ability to inspire, making them a role model for others. AgilePM values leaders who lead by influence rather than authority.

Other Options:

Legitimate: Based on a formal position or title.

Reward: Tied to the ability to offer incentives.

Coercive: Involves using fear or threats, which is not ideal in Agile environments.

Key AgilePM Concepts Referenced:

Leadership Styles: AgilePM Handbook, Chapter 4, Section 4.5.

The purpose of the Foundations Summary in AgilePM is to provide enough information to decide whether the project is likely to deliver a return on investment. This document serves as a comprehensive overview of the project's viability, including a high-level understanding of the business case, objectives, scope, and risks. It ensures that all stakeholders have a clear understanding of the project's potential value and feasibility before significant resources are committed.

When information changes frequently, agile favors high-bandwidth, synchronous communication (e.g., video/teleconferences, facilitated sessions) that enables rapid clarification, shared understanding, and immediate adjustment. Static written documents become quickly outdated, encourage lag between change and consumption, and invite misinterpretation without fast feedback loops. Even email, while asynchronous, can be used for rapid, lightweight updates—but it still lacks the immediacy and richness of dialogue. AgilePM stresses visible progress, collaborative workshops, and frequent reviews to keep everyone aligned as facts evolve. Therefore, in a high-change context, a written document is typically the least effective mechanism to keep stakeholders synchronized, whereas live conversations and demonstrations better support timely inspection and adaptation.

Statement 1: Incorrect. Non-verbal communication refers to gestures, facial expressions, and body language, which cannot be captured in written form.

Statement 2: Correct. Actions, such as behavior during change or leading by example, can convey powerful messages without verbal communication.

Key AgilePM Concepts Referenced:

Non-Verbal Communication in Engagement: AgilePM Handbook, Chapter 4, Section 4.4.

Dialogue: The ability to talk about anything while maintaining relationships and achieving a good outcome is a clear demonstration of effective dialogue. Dialogue is essential for fostering mutual understanding and collaboration, especially during change. AgilePM emphasizes open communication and rich interaction to address concerns and align stakeholders.

Other Options:

Inclusivity: Focuses on ensuring diverse perspectives are included but doesn’t inherently emphasize open conversations.

Connectivity: Refers to fostering connections among team members and stakeholders, which is a broader concept.

Transparency: While important, it primarily relates to openly sharing information rather than fostering dialogue.

Key AgilePM Concepts Referenced:

Engagement and Communication Principles: AgilePM Handbook, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.

Performing Stage: In this stage, team members work cohesively towards achieving results. Roles and processes are clear, and collaboration is at its peak.

Other Stages:

Forming: Initial setup with limited collaboration.

Storming: Characterized by conflict and role clarification.

Adjourning: Focused on disbanding after tasks are completed.

Key AgilePM Concepts Referenced:

Team Development Models: AgilePM Handbook, Chapter 5, Section 5.4.

In an agile context, the Scrum Master embodies servant leadership, coaching the team and the organization to apply Scrum effectively. Their accountability is to establish and uphold Scrum’s empirical approach—transparency, inspection, and adaptation—by ensuring events, artifacts, and values are understood and used as intended. They remove impediments that hinder flow, facilitate collaboration with stakeholders, and help the team focus on outcomes guided by the Sprint and Product Goals. Crucially, the Scrum Master does not manage scope, schedule, or approve the technical solution; those duties lie with product ownership and technical leadership. Nor do they “maximize value” directly—that accountability belongs to the Product Owner. Instead, the Scrum Master improves the system of work so the team can deliver value predictably and sustainably, fostering continuous improvement and adherence to agreed quality standards (e.g., Definition of Done). This aligns with option A and distinguishes it from the governance or authority-centric responsibilities implied by the other options.

Comprehensive and Detailed 150–300 words Explanation (paraphrased from Scrum & AgilePM practice):

When multiple teams build a single product within one project, effective backlog ownership and value alignment are critical. Scrum practice—and AgilePM when combined with Scrum—supports one Product Owner for the product, even when several teams deliver increments in parallel. A single Product Owner preserves a single ordered Product Backlog, unified priorities, and consistent acceptance criteria, minimizing conflicts and dependency churn. Each team may have its own Scrum Master to optimize facilitation and impediment removal locally, but the essential management mechanism for cross-team coherence is shared product ownership (one Product Owner) paired with lightweight cross-team planning and frequent integration. Splitting into two separate projects (with separate roles) for one product typically fragments value flow and complicates governance. Likewise, mandating different Business Visionaries per team dilutes accountability for the product outcome. Hence, the preferred and most effective approach is that both teams share the same Product Owner to maintain a single value and prioritization voice.

Engagement: Defined as the process of increasing employee and stakeholder involvement in organizational change, engagement ensures commitment and minimizes resistance. It is a key responsibility of change managers to foster this involvement, as outlined in AgilePM principles.

Other Options:

Change Agent: Refers to individuals or teams driving the change process, not the process itself.

Sponsor: Represents leadership roles advocating for change but is not a mechanism for involvement.

Line Leader: Plays a supportive role in change but does not define engagement itself.

Key AgilePM Concepts Referenced:

Employee Engagement: AgilePM Handbook, Chapter 3, Section 3.2.

 The Delivery Plan defined by DSDM has a planning horizon that includes the end of the project7. This plan looks towards the future, often months or years ahead, to guide the incremental delivery of the project’s outcomes.

Statement 1: Incorrect. Diverse teams tend to take longer to make decisions due to differing perspectives and approaches. However, this trade-off leads to more thorough and creative decision-making, which is a recognized strength of diverse teams.

Statement 2: Incorrect. Members of diverse teams often require time to align on communication styles, goals, and processes. Effective collaboration in diverse teams is developed through trust-building and active engagement, as outlined in Agile team practices.

Why Diverse Teams Matter in Agile:

Agile emphasizes collaboration and innovation, which are enhanced by diverse teams. However, the process of building trust and understanding takes time. AgilePM recommends fostering inclusivity and addressing conflicts constructively to harness the strengths of diverse teams.

Key AgilePM Concepts Referenced:

Building Effective Teams: AgilePM Handbook, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.

Trust and Transparency in Teams: Chapter 4, Section 4.6.

Comprehensive and Detailed 150 to 300 words Explanation From Exact Extract of Agile Project Management (paraphrased to avoid lengthy quotation):

In AgilePM (DSDM), the Team Leader role closely aligns with the facilitative, servant-leadership responsibilities commonly associated with a Scrum Master in Scrum. The Team Leader is accountable for enabling collaborative working, removing impediments, fostering continuous improvement, and protecting the team’s focus within timeboxes—all hallmarks of Scrum Mastery. While titles differ across frameworks, AgilePM explicitly positions Team Leader as the day-to-day lead for the Solution Development Team, emphasizing facilitation, coaching, and ensuring adherence to agreed practices (e.g., MoSCoW prioritization, Definition of Done/quality criteria). By contrast, a Project Manager in AgilePM is a project-level role focused on governance and business case stewardship; a Product Owner (AgilePM’s Business Visionary/Business Ambassador combination) prioritizes value and backlog—this is not a facilitation role; and a Developer focuses on building the solution. Therefore, when mapping roles between Scrum and AgilePM, the Team Leader most naturally substitutes for, or corresponds to, the Scrum Master responsibilities, ensuring servant leadership without shifting into command-and-control behavior.

The phase in the DSDM process that aims to understand the scope of work and, in broad terms, how it will be carried out, by whom, when, and where is.

According to the DSDM principle ‘Never Compromise Quality,’ the overall level of quality to be delivered within the solution should be agreed at the start of the project5. This principle ensures that quality is not compromised to recover from deviations; instead, the scope of the project will be dynamic6.

The quality of the evolving solution should be tested as part of the iterative development process4. This approach allows for continuous integration and testing of the solution, ensuring that quality is built into the product from the beginning and maintained throughout the development cycle.

AgilePM requires continued business justification. The Business Sponsor owns the investment decision and ensures funding remains warranted by expected benefits, value, and risk. If, at any point, the Sponsor cannot justify further funding in business terms—for example, the benefits have diminished, risk has escalated beyond tolerance, or opportunity costs are too high—stopping the project (or pivoting) is sound financial governance. Reports of overspend, lateness, or team dysfunction (options C and D) are important signals, but they trigger re-planning and decision-making; they are not, by themselves, the governance criterion. Architectural opinions (A) do not substitute for business justification. The decisive governance action is to halt funding when the Business Case no longer holds, safeguarding organizational resources.

Both statements about the Technical Coordinator role in AgilePM are true. The Technical Coordinator provides the same function from a technical perspective as the Business Ambassador does from a business perspective, ensuring that the technical aspects of the project align with the overall business objectives. Additionally, the Technical Coordinator is responsible for ensuring that the solution conforms to the requested technical standards, overseeing the technical integrity and quality of the product throughout the development process.

The strategy for Iterative Development should be considered during the Foundations phase. This phase establishes a firm foundation for the project, ensuring that only the right projects are started and that they are set up correctly, considering aspects such as feasibility and business case1. It’s crucial to have a clear strategy for Iterative Development at this stage to guide the subsequent phases of the project effectively.

The DSDM product that reflects the approach to the management of the project as a whole, considering how the project will be organized and planned from a management perspective, is the Management Approach Definition2. This product outlines the overall strategy for managing the project, including aspects such as roles, responsibilities, and processes, ensuring that the project is aligned with its objectives and can be delivered successfully2.

Timeboxing is the technique that allows for testing the achievability of objectives. This approach involves setting a fixed period (the Timebox) during which specific tasks or objectives must be completed. By focusing on what can be achieved within the set time frame, Timeboxing helps teams test and validate whether their objectives are realistic and attainable. This iterative approach ensures continuous assessment and adaptation, promoting efficient project management.

Statement 1: Incorrect. Agile is rooted in adaptability and tailoring practices to fit the specific needs of a project. Taking a single framework and applying it persistently reflects rigidity, which contradicts the Agile principles of flexibility and continuous improvement. AgilePM advocates selecting and combining frameworks (e.g., Scrum, Kanban) based on the project environment rather than sticking to one rigidly.

Statement 2: Correct. Resilience, flexibility, and a willingness to learn are central to Agile practitioners. They must adapt to challenges and new information to ensure continuous delivery of value. This aligns with Agile values of embracing change over following strict plans and the AgilePM philosophy of iterative improvement.

Key AgilePM Concepts Referenced:

Flexibility over Rigidity: AgilePM Handbook, Chapter 1, Section 1.4 ("The Agile Mindset").

Iterative Development and Learning: Chapter 3, Section 3.5 (Iterative Principles).

Statement 1: Incorrect. While accountability is important, it should be addressed constructively, not by drawing attention to failures in a punitive way.

Statement 2: Incorrect. Constructive conflict is essential for innovation and problem-solving. Avoiding conflict entirely can lead to unresolved issues and reduced performance.

Key AgilePM Concepts Referenced:

Team Dynamics and Conflict Management: AgilePM Handbook, Chapter 5, Section 5.5.

Qualitative Measures: These provide insight into the underlying reasons, motivations, and emotions behind behaviors. Examples include interviews, open-ended surveys, and focus groups.

Other Options:

B: Quantitative measures focus on numerical data but lack context.

C: Leading indicators predict future performance but don’t explain behavior.

D: Lagging indicators reflect past performance, not the reasons behind it.

Key AgilePM Concepts Referenced:

Measurement and Analysis: AgilePM Handbook, Chapter 7, Section 7.5.

Transparency: Sharing the rationale and timeline for change ensures openness and builds trust among stakeholders. Transparency is fundamental to managing expectations and mitigating resistance.

Other Options:

Inclusivity: Focuses on ensuring all voices are heard.

Connectivity: Refers to fostering relationships.

Empathy: Relates to understanding others’ feelings, not information sharing.

Key AgilePM Concepts Referenced:

Transparent Communication: AgilePM Handbook, Chapter 4, Section 4.2.

The AgilePM lifecycle typically includes Pre-Project, Feasibility, Foundations, Evolutionary Development/Realization, Deployment, and Post-Project (benefits). Feasibility is designed as a lightweight, optional phase to confirm there is a sensible case to proceed before deeper investment. In some contexts—when viability is already established, or scope and constraints are straightforward—Feasibility may be skipped or greatly abbreviated, moving directly to Foundations, where the approach, governance, and baselines are established. By contrast, Foundations is expected for alignment and control, and Realization (timeboxed delivery) is where the solution is built; these are not optional if you are proceeding with delivery. Thus, Feasibility is the optional phase.

When initially creating MoSCoW priorities in AgilePM, the primary focus is on Timebox priorities. This approach ensures that each Timebox (a fixed period during which specific tasks must be completed) has clear and prioritized objectives. The MoSCoW method (Must have, Should have, Could have, Won't have this time) helps the team to deliver the most critical features within the given timeframe, thereby optimizing the value delivered in each iteration. This prioritization ensures that essential functionalities are completed first, making the project adaptable and resilient to changes.

Scrum supplies the core framework (roles, events, artifacts) for empirically building products, but it is intentionally lightweight. AgilePM (based on DSDM) complements Scrum by offering a well-tested pool of practices, tools, and techniques that strengthen day-to-day delivery and governance without altering Scrum’s essence. Typical enhancements include MoSCoW prioritization to manage variable scope, timeboxing to protect cadence, facilitated workshops and modeling to accelerate shared understanding, and explicit roles for business involvement to improve decision flow. AgilePM also provides guidance on project-level controls—such as business cases, incremental release planning, and benefits focus—that sit outside Scrum’s product-delivery scope. For a Scrum Master, this combination is valuable: Scrum remains the engine of iterative delivery, while AgilePM offers practical methods to refine backlog refinement, clarify acceptance criteria, manage dependencies, and support predictable delivery against time and cost constraints. Thus, the pairing gives Scrum Masters a richer toolkit to coach teams, align stakeholders, and handle real-world project contexts where governance, prioritization, and incremental release structures are needed—precisely what option B describes.

Statement 1: Correct. Diverse teams leverage different perspectives, leading to higher creativity and innovation, as Agile encourages collaborative solutions.

Statement 2: Incorrect. Diverse teams typically take longer to reach consensus due to varying viewpoints and styles of communication, though the decisions they make are often more robust.

Key AgilePM Concepts Referenced:

Team Collaboration and Creativity: AgilePM Handbook, Chapter 5, Section 5.3.

AgilePM (based on DSDM) defines a clear set of project and solution delivery roles. At the project level: Business Sponsor (investment owner), Business Visionary (custodian of the business vision), and Project Manager (overall project management and governance). Within the Solution Development Team: Team Leader, Business Ambassador, Business Analyst, Solution Developer, Solution Tester, and technical governance via the Technical Coordinator role. Notably, AgilePM uses the title Technical Coordinator rather than “Solution Architect.” Although many organizations informally use “solution architect,” it is not an AgilePM role name; its responsibilities most closely map to the Technical Coordinator, who ensures technical coherence, manages technical risks, and upholds non-functional requirements and architectural guidelines. Therefore, among the options given, Solution Architect is the one that is not an AgilePM-defined project role, whereas Business Visionary, Project Manager, and Solution Developer are explicitly recognized roles in the AgilePM framework.

Comprehensive and Detailed 150 to 300 words Explanation From Exact Extract of Agile Project Management (paraphrased):

AgilePM’s MoSCoW prioritization is always applied within a defined timeframe (e.g., a release or timebox). A requirement can be a Must Have for a specific delivery window while being a Should/Could when viewed across the whole product roadmap. Timeboxing, dependency considerations, and the need to deliver a coherent, usable increment by a certain date mean that priority is inherently time-contextual. While budget and resources influence overall planning, AgilePM fixes time and cost to provide predictability and flexes scope to protect quality; thus, the most legitimate driver for a requirement’s priority to change is the timeframe to which MoSCoW is applied. As delivery horizons shift (e.g., near-term release vs. later release), the same requirement’s priority may be re-appraised to ensure the Business Case and Product/Release Goals are met. Therefore, Different timeframe is the correct reason that explains variations in backlog priority.

Agile delivery expects each increment to be usable, meet the agreed quality bar (Definition of Done), and move the product toward its goal. AgilePM’s incremental, timeboxed approach stresses that every slice should be demonstrably valuable or verifiable, with acceptance criteria satisfied and quality never compromised. However, increments in an evolving solution are typically additive and cumulative; they build upon prior work to extend capability. Requiring that an increment be independent of all others is unnecessary and often impractical for integrated solutions. What matters is that it is coherent, tested, and acceptable to stakeholders within the agreed standards. Thus, options A, C, and D describe standard expectations for an increment in AgilePM/Scrum-aligned practice, whereas B does not. Therefore, B is the correct “NOT” choice.

Statement 1: Correct. Force Field Analysis identifies driving and restraining forces for change, helping to address barriers and resistance.

Statement 2: Incorrect. The analysis should be a collaborative effort involving stakeholders, not solely created by the change manager.

Key AgilePM Concepts Referenced:

Force Field Analysis as a Tool: AgilePM Handbook, Chapter 7, Section 7.2.