The best matching is:
1 → C (Social media)
2 → E (Collaborative workspace)
3 → A (Face-to-face)
4 → D (Email)
5 → B (Instant messaging)
Now the AgilePM reasoning for each:
1. Mira wants to gather interest from potential future guests for a unique aromatherapy oil
Best answer: C. Social media
This is the most effective option because the audience is potential future guests , who are external stakeholders with relatively low power but useful market influence. Brinda wants market research on likely interest, so the communication method should reach a broad audience efficiently and allow feedback collection at scale.
Why this fits AgilePM:
AgilePM values timely feedback from stakeholders and users .
Social media is highly suitable for testing interest, gathering reactions, and validating assumptions quickly.
It helps support business value decisions before investing further.
Why others are weaker:
Face-to-face is too limited in reach.
Email is too narrow and inefficient for market testing.
Document or collaborative workspace are internal tools, not ideal for external mass engagement.
2. A Guest Experience Team member must collaborate with Priya in India on promotional materials
Best answer: E. Collaborative workspace
This is the best method because the task involves co-creating content , likely with revisions, comments, versions, and shared visibility across time zones. Since Priya is part-time and there is a 1.5-hour time difference , a collaborative workspace supports both synchronous and asynchronous work.
Why this fits AgilePM:
AgilePM encourages effective collaboration and visibility of work .
A collaborative workspace allows both people to:
edit shared materials,
review updates,
track changes,
reduce version confusion,
and keep progress transparent.
Why not email:
Email creates fragmented threads and version-control issues.
It is not the best tool for iterative collaboration on shared promotional assets.
3. Mira needs Sukra’s input on replacing the waterfall with a rainwater purification system; both are on site
Best answer: A. Face-to-face
This is the strongest choice because the discussion involves technical feasibility, impact, and likely trade-offs , and both people are physically present at the Eco-spa. A face-to-face discussion gives the richest communication and allows rapid clarification.
Why this fits AgilePM:
AgilePM favors direct communication where possible , especially for complex or potentially ambiguous topics.
Technical and business conversations benefit from immediate back-and-forth discussion.
Being on site means they may also inspect the actual area together, which reduces misunderstanding.
Why others are weaker:
Instant messaging is less rich for a nuanced design/feasibility discussion.
Email is too slow and formal for a collaborative on-site decision.
Documenting the outcome may happen later, but the most effective method for the discussion itself is face-to-face.
4. Hira needs Sarah’s urgent formal approval to hire a contractor; Sarah is in South America
Best answer: D. Email
This is the best answer because the communication need is both urgent and formal . Sarah is remote, and Hira needs a clear, traceable approval for hiring a contractor for the next four Sprints.
Why this fits AgilePM:
AgilePM values communication that is fit for purpose .
Since this is a sponsor decision with governance and approval implications, email provides:
Why not instant messaging:
Instant messaging may be faster, but it is less suitable for formal approval that may need auditability and clarity.
For sponsor-level decisions affecting budget/resources, traceability matters.
5. Wanida identifies a health and safety issue on site and must work with Sukra to resolve it
Best answer: B. Instant messaging
This is the most effective option because the issue is urgent, operational, and time-sensitive . Even if both are on or around the resort, instant messaging enables rapid contact, immediate coordination, and quick sharing of updates while they move between locations.
Why this fits AgilePM:
AgilePM supports fast, responsive communication when risks or blockers emerge.
A health and safety issue requires quick coordination to minimize impact and prevent escalation.
Instant messaging is practical for immediate action, especially on an active site.
Why not face-to-face here:
Face-to-face is rich, but in this matching set it is better used for the complex solution discussion in scenario 3.
For scenario 5, the key need is speed of coordination around an urgent site issue.
Submit