MSP-Practitioner Questions and Answers

Comprehensive and Detailed 200 to 250 words of Explanation From Exact Extract of project-programme-and-portfolio-management of 5th Edition MSP:

MSP 5th Edition advocates for the use of different delivery life cycles depending on the nature of the work. While some projects are best suited to a "linear" (waterfall) approach, others benefit from incremental or continual improvement (agile) approaches. Continual improvement is particularly effective when the outcome can be delivered in stages, allowing for feedback and refinement at each step.

Option D is the correct answer because the physical rollout of smart meters is a repetitive process that provides numerous opportunities for learning. By "installing new water meters gradually," the programme can apply lessons learned from the first set of installations to the next, improving efficiency, customer communication, and technical reliability as the rollout progresses. This is the essence of the Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) cycle within the transformational flow.

Option A (legal/contractual) usually requires a discrete, linear completion.

Option B (IT systems) often requires complex integration that might be incremental but is less about "continual improvement" of a repetitive rollout.

Option C is a R&D/product development activity.

Option D represents the best fit for an iterative, learning-based approach where the pace and quality of delivery are refined based on real-world operational feedback.

The Programme Manager holds responsibility for ensuring that individual projects align with the overarching programme objectives during capability delivery. This role coordinates the interdependencies, monitors progress, and manages risks to ensure projects collectively deliver the intended outcomes.

The MSP Practitioner notes: “Programme manager is responsible for all tasks in delivering the capability. This is a continual activity throughout the programme.” This alignment ensures that outputs contribute directly to the transformational goals and benefit realization plan, avoiding scope creep or misaligned efforts.

While the Senior Responsible Owner (SRO) provides strategic accountability and the Business Change Manager (BCM) focuses on benefits realization, the Programme Manager operationalizes these objectives through effective project oversight and control.

The Programme Office supports through administrative and coordination activities but does not have direct accountability for strategic alignment of projects.

Maintaining this alignment is critical for delivering business value and achieving programme success in complex transformational environments.

The POTI (Projects, Operations, Teams, and Infrastructure) model is used to define the high-level scope of the Blueprint. The Blueprint theme encompasses the detailed design and delivery aspects of the programme’s transformation. As per MSP Practitioner, "POTI defines high level scope of blueprint," situating the model firmly within the Blueprint Design and Delivery governance theme.

Approval to proceed is a critical input for the 'Managing the Tranches' process. Without formal approval, the programme cannot move into tranche delivery phases. The MSP Practitioner specifies: “Without approval to proceed, programme will not enter this process.” This highlights the formal gating and control process essential for structured programme progression.

Comprehensive and Detailed 200 to 250 words of Explanation From Exact Extract of project-programme-and-portfolio-management of 5th Edition MSP:

In MSP 5th Edition, the Structure Theme is heavily reliant on the principle of 'Realize measurable benefits.' A core tenet of this principle is that benefits should not be "big bang" deliveries at the very end of a programme. Instead, MSP advocates for an incremental approach where the programme is broken down into tranches, each culminating in a landing point. A landing point is a point in time when a set of capabilities is transitioned into the business, allowing for the realization of intermediate benefits and the embedding of new ways of working.

The SRO’s request to delay all transitions until the end of the programme directly contradicts this principle. Option C is correct because MSP 5th Edition mandates that outcomes of benefit should be embedded at these intermediate landing points. By doing so, the programme provides early value to the organization, validates the "pathway to benefits," and reduces the overall risk of failure. Delaying all transitions to the end creates a high-risk environment where the business may be overwhelmed by a massive amount of change at once. Furthermore, the feedback loop from Tranche 1 (the customer complaints) should be used to improve the transition process for subsequent tranches, not to abandon the incremental delivery model altogether. The structure of a programme is specifically designed to provide these "safe harbors" where progress is assessed and benefits are consolidated before moving forward.

Comprehensive and Detailed 200 to 250 words of Explanation From Exact Extract of project-programme-and-portfolio-management of 5th Edition MSP:

The Senior Responsible Owner (SRO) is the individual ultimately accountable for the programme. One of the SRO's primary responsibilities is to ensure that the programme is governed effectively and that all necessary controls are in place to protect the organization and ensure benefit realization. Governance includes the approval of the Programme Strategy and its subsidiary plans, such as the Risk Management Approach and the Transition Plan.

In this scenario, holding a risk review before transition is a critical governance control. Because this decision was agreed with the Sponsoring Group, it becomes a formal part of the programme’s oversight framework. Option A is correct because the SRO is the person authorized to approve the "rules of the game" for the programme. While the Programme Manager (Option B) might draft the document and the Programme Office (Option D) might maintain it, the authority to approve how the programme will be controlled—especially regarding high-stakes activities like transitioning to new customer processes—rests with the SRO. The SRO must be satisfied that the risks are being managed before the business assumes the impact of the change. This ensures that the programme remains aligned with corporate risk appetite and strategic objectives.

The Business Change Manager (BCM) holds the primary responsibility for monitoring the progress of benefits realization against the plan. This role is focused on ensuring that the expected benefits from the programme’s outputs and outcomes are actually realized in the business environment. The BCM works closely with stakeholders, operational managers, and programme teams to track benefit achievement, resolve issues that might impede benefit delivery, and report progress.

According to the MSP Practitioner: “BCM is responsible for monitoring benefits.” This accountability includes validating that the changes introduced by the programme are embedded within business operations and are delivering measurable value as outlined in the Benefits Realization Plan. The BCM must maintain a clear line of sight on benefits, manage dependencies between projects and operational teams, and oversee any transition activities required to sustain benefits.

The Programme Manager and Senior Responsible Owner (SRO) have broader accountability for programme delivery and governance, but it is the BCM who acts as the day-to-day custodian of benefits. They translate strategic benefit objectives into operational terms and ensure the organisation adapts to new ways of working. This ensures that benefits do not remain theoretical but are tangibly realized, measured, and maximized over time.

Effective benefits monitoring by the BCM mitigates the risk of programmes delivering outputs that do not translate into business improvements or strategic value, reinforcing MSP’s emphasis on outcome-focused delivery.

Comprehensive and Detailed 200 to 250 words of Explanation From Exact Extract of project-programme-and-portfolio-management of 5th Edition MSP:

The 'Evaluate new information' process occurs at the end of each tranche (and continuously throughout) to assess whether the programme remains viable and aligned with its objectives. This process involves reviewing performance, risks, and external opportunities that could impact the business case or the target operating model.

In MSP 5th Edition, the Programme Manager is responsible for the setup and day-to-day management of the programme, which includes the analysis of factors that might require a change in direction. Option B is correct because the Programme Manager is tasked with evaluating the impact of such new information—in this case, a new supplier offering a faster, cheaper alternative—on the overall programme plan and the project delivery schedule. The Programme Manager performs the detailed analysis and then presents the findings and recommendations to the Senior Responsible Owner (SRO) for a final decision. While the SRO is the ultimate decision-maker, the responsibility for the evaluation of technical and management information resides with the Programme Manager. They must determine how this new "imported" solution affects dependencies, costs, and the realization of benefits before the SRO decides whether to pivot the strategy for Tranche 3.

Media is classified as an influencer stakeholder type because it can shape public opinion and stakeholder perceptions, thus affecting programme success indirectly.

The MSP Practitioner notes: “Media can influence other stakeholders as well,” highlighting its role in communication and shaping the narrative around the programme.

Understanding and managing influencer stakeholders like media is critical for reputation management, gaining public support, and mitigating risks associated with negative publicity.

Comprehensive and Detailed 200 to 250 words of Explanation From Exact Extract of project-programme-and-portfolio-management of 5th Edition MSP:

In MSP 5th Edition, the Assurance Theme is critical for providing the SRO and the Sponsoring Group with confidence that the programme is on track and being managed effectively. For assurance to be truly effective and reliable, it must adhere to several "success factors." One of the most vital factors is Independence.

Independence in assurance means that the person or team conducting the review is not directly involved in the delivery or management of the programme they are auditing. This lack of bias ensures that the findings are objective and that the "true" status of the programme is reported without fear of internal repercussions or a desire to hide failures. By recruiting an external consultant to perform the health check, the Programme Office Lead is ensuring that the review is conducted by an entity that is entirely separate from the programme’s internal politics and day-to-day operations. This satisfies the requirement for "third-line" assurance in the MSP framework. While internal audits (second-line) are valuable, external reviews provide the highest level of independence. This process gives the new SRO an impartial baseline of the programme’s health, enabling them to make informed decisions about future tranches without relying solely on potentially optimistic reports from the delivery team.

Dependency management is not considered a principal control for managing the tranches but rather a governance control related to delivering the benefits.

The MSP Practitioner explains: “Dependency management is governance control for Delivering the benefits,” which means while dependencies between projects and benefits must be managed, they are not direct tranche controls.

Principal tranche controls focus on approving and reviewing Business Cases and conducting Benefit Reviews to ensure each tranche delivers value and remains aligned with strategic objectives.

Recognizing this distinction helps ensure the programme maintains effective controls focused on stage delivery and benefit realization without conflating governance functions.

Stakeholder engagement is managed and delivered primarily through the Stakeholder Profiles and the Programme Communications Plan. The communications plan ensures stakeholders receive the right information at the right time to maintain engagement and support. The MSP Practitioner states, "Stakeholder engagement is delivered by Stakeholder profiles and programme communications plan" which provide structured means of communicating and managing stakeholder interests to ensure effective programme governance and delivery.

A key attribute for a Programme Manager is a good knowledge of project management approaches. This expertise enables the Programme Manager to oversee and coordinate multiple interrelated projects, ensuring they deliver outputs that collectively realize programme objectives.

The MSP Practitioner states: “Programme Manager should have good project management skills,” emphasizing that while strategic leadership and stakeholder engagement are important, the ability to manage the complexities of project delivery is fundamental to the Programme Manager role.

While change management skills and access to key stakeholders are important complementary abilities, the core responsibility of managing project delivery across a dossier of projects necessitates strong project management knowledge. The Programme Manager acts as the bridge between strategic programme objectives and tactical project execution, requiring detailed understanding of project methodologies, risk management, scheduling, resource coordination, and quality assurance.

This knowledge supports effective integration, issue resolution, and benefits delivery, positioning the Programme Manager as a central figure in programme success.

Comprehensive and Detailed 200 to 250 words of Explanation From Exact Extract of project-programme-and-portfolio-management of 5th Edition MSP:

The Justification Theme in MSP 5th Edition includes the ongoing assessment of the Business Case in light of new information, including opportunities. An opportunity is an uncertain event that would have a positive impact on the programme's objectives if it occurs. MSP encourages a proactive approach to opportunity management as part of maintaining a robust and attractive justification for the programme.

Option B is correct because the Sponsoring Group and the SRO have a duty to maximize the value of the programme. Pursuing an external funding source that aligns with the programme's existing outputs (smart meters/leak detection) is a direct way to improve the programme's financial viability. By applying for the incentive, the programme is attempting to "exploit" or "enhance" an opportunity. This aligns with the MSP principle of 'Realize measurable benefits.' Option A is less accurate because, while contingency is used for risks, opportunities are often managed by business-case adjustments rather than just drawing from a contingency fund. Option D refers to the initial "Identify the Programme" stage where options analysis is required for the whole programme; it does not strictly apply to pursuing a tactical funding opportunity mid-tranche that already aligns with the approved scope. The justification remains valid—and indeed strengthened—by successfully capturing additional value.

"Formally Approve" is not one of the MSP-defined levels of stakeholder engagement. MSP outlines levels such as Maintain Interest, Active Consultation, and Keep Informed to categorize the nature and intensity of stakeholder engagement.

The MSP Practitioner indicates: “Fourth option is face to face,” which means formal approval is a governance or decision-making activity rather than an engagement level.

Understanding and applying appropriate engagement levels ensures stakeholders receive relevant information and involvement suited to their influence and interest, facilitating support and minimizing resistance.

This categorization aids programme teams in managing communication and expectations effectively.

MSP is most suited for programmes characterized by high ambiguity, such as those involving long-term societal or political change. These programmes often have evolving objectives and require flexible governance and transformational approaches.

The MSP Practitioner states: “MSP is best suited for programmes which have high ambiguity,” indicating its strength in managing complex, uncertain environments where outcomes may not be clearly defined at outset.

While MSP can be applied to technically complex projects, its focus on benefits realization, stakeholder engagement, and transformational flow makes it ideal for complex societal or political programmes where adaptability and governance are critical.

Comprehensive and Detailed 200 to 250 words of Explanation From Exact Extract of project-programme-and-portfolio-management of 5th Edition MSP:

In the MSP 5th Edition, the principle of 'Lead with Purpose' is fundamental to ensuring that all stakeholders understand the "why" behind a programme's existence. This principle dictates that a programme must have a clear vision and a consistent direction, which is steered by senior leadership. According to the MSP 5th Edition guidance, leading with purpose means that those in leadership roles must be able to articulate the future state and the justification for the change. It is not merely about managing tasks; it is about providing the strategic narrative that justifies the transformation and the impact it will have on the organization and its people.

In the scenario provided, the CEngO is acting as a visible leader. The reason Option B is the correct application of this principle is that 'Lead with Purpose' focuses on the clarity of the Vision and the Strategic Objectives. By explaining "what changes are being made and why," the CEngO is ensuring that the staff—even those facing redundancy—understand the broader purpose of the programme. This transparency is essential for maintaining integrity and trust during a period of uncertainty. While providing support (Option A) is a critical part of stakeholder engagement and people management, the core of the 'Lead with Purpose' principle is the communication of the programme's intent and the rationale for the journey being undertaken. This principle ensures that the programme remains aligned with its desired outcomes and that leadership remains accountable for the direction of the change.

Recruitment Policy is not considered a critical organizational element in MSP, whereas Delivery Mechanism for Change, Business as Usual, and Corporate Strategy are recognized as essential elements.

The MSP Practitioner states: “All other are critical organizational elements,” highlighting that MSP focuses on how organizations govern and implement change (delivery mechanisms), maintain ongoing operations (business as usual), and set strategic direction (corporate strategy).

Recruitment policies, while important HR tools, are not part of the critical organizational elements that MSP emphasizes in programme governance and transformational change management.

The Programme Manager is responsible for producing the Business Case. This document outlines the justification for the programme, including costs, benefits, risks, and options. The Programme Manager prepares the Business Case to ensure it is comprehensive, realistic, and aligned with the programme’s objectives.

The MSP Practitioner notes: “Programme manager prepares it as he is responsible for it,” emphasizing the role’s responsibility to articulate the strategic rationale and provide a sound basis for decision-making. The Business Case is then reviewed and approved by the SRO and other governance bodies.

The Programme Manager collaborates with other roles such as the Business Change Manager and SRO to ensure all aspects of the Business Case are valid and supported. This role is pivotal in maintaining the integrity and credibility of the programme justification throughout its lifecycle.

Comprehensive and Detailed 200 to 250 words of Explanation From Exact Extract of project-programme-and-portfolio-management of 5th Edition MSP:

The 'Justification' theme in MSP 5th Edition is central to the programme's lifecycle, ensuring that the investment remains desirable, viable, and achievable. It is not simply about choosing the cheapest option; it is about ensuring that the expenditures made are necessary to secure the projected benefits. This is often referred to as the "Value for Money" assessment.

In this case, the use of a specialized external change office is a strategic decision to mitigate the risk of "value leakage"—where benefits are lost because the organization fails to adopt the new ways of working. Option A is the correct answer because MSP 5th Edition explicitly states that the costs of a programme (including specialized support services) must be weighed against the scale of the transformation and the value of the benefits at risk. If the transformation is "significant," as described, the cost of expert change management is often a necessary investment to ensure the Target Operating Model is successfully reached. Option B is incorrect as it describes "contingency" incorrectly; justification is about the primary investment, not just using leftover savings. Option C is a management choice but does not invalidate the justification principle if external expertise is deemed more effective. The justification theme requires the Senior Responsible Owner (SRO) to continually validate that the costs of these services are outweighed by the improved likelihood of benefit realization.

Comprehensive and Detailed 200 to 250 words of Explanation From Exact Extract of project-programme-and-portfolio-management of 5th Edition MSP:

The 'Plan progressive delivery' process is the stage where the programme moves from high-level concepts to tangible, resourced plans. A key requirement of this process is to ensure that the resources (people, assets, and funding) required for the first tranche are not just identified, but actually committed by the business owners.

Option A is the correct answer. According to MSP 5th Edition, a programme should not proceed into a delivery tranche (such as Tranche 1) until there is a firm commitment from the functional managers who "own" the resources. The Call Centre Manager is the person who must balance the needs of the programme against the needs of business-as-usual (BAU). If they do not commit the staff during the planning process, the programme risks failing in its first tranche due to resource shortages. The Sponsoring Group (Option C) provides the high-level mandate and funding, but the actual day-to-day commitment of staff must come from the operational line managers. This commitment is a prerequisite for the SRO to "Agree to proceed." Obtaining this commitment early is a critical success factor for programme management, as it reduces the risk of conflict between the programme and the business once delivery starts.

Learning from Experience is not classified as a Governance Theme but rather a Programme Management Principle in MSP.

The MSP Practitioner clarifies: “Learning from experience is Programme management principle,” which means it influences how programmes are managed but does not constitute a governance theme.

Governance Themes focus on structural elements such as Leadership and Stakeholder Engagement, Quality Management, and Organization, which provide the framework and controls for programme delivery.

Understanding this distinction aids in correctly applying MSP components to programme design and governance structures.

The Sponsoring Group, not the SRO, is accountable for confirming the Programme Mandate. The MSP Practitioner clearly states: "The Sponsoring Group is accountable for confirming the mandate," which means the SRO oversees delivery but does not hold responsibility for initial mandate confirmation. Meanwhile, the Programme Manager has ownership of the Vision Statement and Blueprint, aligning with delivery responsibilities.

The Benefit Realization Plan identifies milestones for benefit reviews. This plan details when and how benefits will be measured, reviewed, and managed to ensure they are achieved as expected.

The MSP Practitioner explains: “Benefits management plan identifies benefit reviews to increase likelihood of success.” Regular benefit reviews help detect issues early, enable corrective actions, and maintain stakeholder confidence.

This plan is crucial for monitoring benefit progress post-delivery, coordinating with business change activities, and ensuring benefits sustain over the long term. It aligns benefit tracking with programme stages and organizational priorities, enhancing accountability and transparency.

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.

A dis-benefit is defined as a measurable decline resulting from an outcome perceived as negative. The MSP Practitioner clearly states: "Measurable decline resulting from outcome perceived as negative defines mis-benefit," highlighting the need to manage and mitigate dis-benefits as part of benefits management to ensure overall programme success.

When a viable Business Case does not emerge, seeking further funding is generally not considered a normal or effective response. The MSP Practitioner explicitly states that funding should not be increased without a credible justification, as this risks wasted resources on programmes unlikely to deliver benefits.

Instead, typical responses include redesigning a less ambitious Blueprint to reduce complexity or costs, closing the programme if it is no longer viable, or exploring alternative approaches to delivering the Blueprint that might improve feasibility and value realization.

The Business Case acts as a foundational control and justification mechanism, ensuring programmes only proceed with a clear strategic rationale and realistic benefit realization plan. Continuing to invest without a strong Business Case undermines governance principles and risks programme failure.

Therefore, while redesign or closure are pragmatic approaches, “Further funding is not provided in case of inability to find a viable business case,” reinforcing MSP’s disciplined approach to investment and risk management.

Comprehensive and Detailed 200 to 250 words of Explanation From Exact Extract of project-programme-and-portfolio-management of 5th Edition MSP:

The Structure Theme in MSP 5th Edition defines how the programme is organized into tranches to manage the delivery of capability and the realization of benefits. While tranches provide a natural "step-by-step" progression, MSP 5th Edition is designed to be more flexible and agile than previous versions. It explicitly recognizes that tranches do not always have to be strictly sequential.

Option B is the correct answer. The guidance states that tranches can overlap if there is a clear business reason to do so—such as a change in priority or the early availability of resources—and if the risks of doing so are managed. Overlapping tranches allows the programme to "bring pace and value" (an MSP Principle) by initiating work as soon as it is feasible. While Option D raises a valid point about risk, MSP does not forbid overlapping; it simply requires that the risks be assessed. If the resources from the Customer Processes Project are now free, using them to start the Training Project early is a sensible management decision that accelerates the delivery of capability. The end-of-tranche review (Option C) still occurs for Tranche 2, but it does not prevent work from a future tranche from beginning if the SRO approves the deviation from the initial plan to maximize efficiency.

Decision Item

Document

Each project will have a change control authority... up to £5,000. Above this level... referred to a programme authority... over £10,000 to the CEO/CFO

Programme strategy: Decision-making approach

There is a low likelihood that legislation may be passed that allows customers to immediately switch utility providers without penalty

Risk register

'Return on investment' will be used at the programme level as the basis for calculating the profit or loss generated in relation to money invested

Decision register

Setting monetary thresholds for escalation and delegation is a "Decision-making approach" activity. Legislative uncertainty with a probability and impact is a Risk. Documenting the specific criteria or "basis" used for previous or current decisions belongs in the Decision Register.

All three—Governance, Boundary, and Management—are defined as Information Baselines in MSP. An Information Baseline refers to essential information repositories and frameworks that support programme control and management.

The MSP Practitioner states: “All are defined information baselines,” meaning that governance baselines set controls and accountability, boundary baselines define scope and limits, and management baselines cover operational details such as risks and issues.

Together, these baselines form a comprehensive information foundation, enabling effective oversight, coordination, and decision-making throughout the programme lifecycle.

Understanding and maintaining these baselines ensures transparency, consistency, and effective control over complex transformational programmes.

Comprehensive and Detailed 200 to 250 words of Explanation From Exact Extract of project-programme-and-portfolio-management of 5th Edition MSP:

The 'Deal with ambiguity' principle in MSP 5th Edition recognizes that programmes operate in evolving environments where not all information is known at the outset. This principle requires programme teams to acknowledge uncertainty and proceed with the best available information, rather than waiting for absolute certainty, which may never come. Ambiguity often stems from external factors, such as potential regulatory changes, which are outside the programme’s direct control but can significantly affect its viability.

In this scenario, the potential for a "fair pricing policy" is a classic example of ambiguity during the 'Identify the programme' process. By including this information in the programme brief, the Programme Manager and SRO are surfacing a critical uncertainty early. Option A is the correct answer because the primary purpose of identifying such ambiguity at this stage is to enable the Sponsoring Group to make an informed "invest/no-invest" decision. The programme brief is designed to provide enough information to justify moving to the more detailed 'Design the programme' stage. If the Sponsoring Group is unaware of this potential impact on benefits, they cannot accurately assess the programme's value or risk profile. Ignoring the ambiguity until a formal risk process is established (Option C) would be a failure of this principle, as MSP encourages proactive transparency regarding what is unknown or uncertain from the very beginning of the transformational flow.

The Quality and Assurance Strategy is a governance document that outlines how quality management and assurance processes will be applied throughout the programme. Governance documents establish controls and frameworks for programme management, ensuring standards and compliance are maintained.

The MSP Practitioner clarifies that strategies—such as Quality Management Strategy—are integral governance documents that help define expectations, responsibilities, and quality assurance mechanisms. While the Blueprint and Project Dossier are boundary and management documents respectively, and the Risk Register is a management tool, governance documents like the Quality and Assurance Strategy provide oversight and control mechanisms essential for programme success.

This strategy ensures that quality is embedded in programme processes and deliverables, aligning with best practices and stakeholder expectations, which is vital for confidence and assurance in transformational change initiatives.

The Senior Responsible Owner (SRO) approves the Business Case and is accountable for ensuring it remains valid and aligned with strategic objectives.

The MSP Practitioner states: “SRO approves (as he is accountable for it).” This underscores the SRO’s critical role in governing programme justification and ensuring investment decisions remain sound.

While the Sponsoring Group may endorse or sponsor the programme, formal accountability and approval for the Business Case rest with the SRO, ensuring clear responsibility for delivery against agreed benefits.

This accountability helps maintain control and confidence in programme investment and delivery.

The four critical tests for benefits validation are Description, Observable outcomes, Attribution, and Measurement. "Attribution" assesses whether the programme is genuinely responsible for the benefit. The MSP Practitioner confirms, "Four tests of business validation are: Description, Observable outcomes, Attribution and Measurement," emphasizing the importance of validating benefits to ensure they result directly from programme activities.