The correct answer is B .
In AgilePM, risks are often viewed in two broad ways:
VUCA-based risks arise from volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity in the environment. These are usually external or context-driven.
Approach-based risks arise from how the project is being managed or understood, especially when people misapply the AgilePM method or resist its principles.
In this scenario, Lee Tan’s concern is about the lack of detailed upfront requirements . That concern does not primarily come from an external uncertainty such as regulation, market instability, or environmental change. Instead, it reflects discomfort with the AgilePM delivery approach itself .
That is why this is an approach-based risk .
Why B is correct:
AgilePM does not depend on fully detailed requirements upfront before meaningful work can begin. Instead, it works from:
The method assumes that detail will emerge progressively as the team learns more, collaborates with stakeholders, and validates what creates value.
Lee’s concern suggests a misunderstanding of AgilePM. He is expecting a more traditional predictive model where complete definition happens early and change is seen mainly as a problem. AgilePM, by contrast, is designed to handle evolving understanding and controlled change through iteration.
So the risk here is approach-based because the issue lies in expectations about the delivery model, not in the external environment.
Why the other options are incorrect:
A. Approach-based, because there is lack of clarity of purpose preventing development from starting.
This is not the best answer. The issue described is not a lack of purpose. The case already provides a clear vision for the Eco-spa. Lee’s concern is about insufficient detailed upfront requirements, not absence of project purpose.
C. VUCA-based, because market shifts and changing guest expectations require detailed definition of requirements.
This is incorrect because VUCA conditions usually support the opposite conclusion: when the environment is changing, a flexible and iterative approach is more suitable than trying to define everything in detail upfront.
D. VUCA-based, because external sustainability pressures create uncertainty that requires a flexible scope.
This statement may sound plausible in a general AgilePM sense, but it does not match the scenario. Lee’s concern is specifically about the project approach to requirements, not about external sustainability pressures as the source of the risk.
AgilePM perspective:
AgilePM accepts that:
not all detail is known at the start,
learning happens during delivery,
change is expected and managed,
and value is refined through collaboration and feedback.
Therefore, when a stakeholder is worried because requirements are not fully detailed upfront, the relevant risk is often not environmental uncertainty, but misalignment with the AgilePM approach .
So the best answer is B .
Submit