Pass the PeopleCert MSP MSP-Practitioner Questions and answers with CertsForce

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.

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.

Outcomes are defined as the new operational state achieved after the transition of capability into live operations. They represent the changes in the organization’s way of working resulting from the combined effect of project outputs.

The MSP Practitioner states:“Outcomes are combined outputs or projects to bring a new operational state in organization,”emphasizing that outcomes go beyond deliverables to reflect actual changes in operations and behaviours.

This distinction is critical in MSP’s focus on transformational change, ensuring programmes deliver real, sustainable benefits rather than just outputs.

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.

Both the Business Change Manager (BCM) and the Programme Manager share responsibility for aligning projects with benefits realization. The MSP Practitioner highlights that“Both roles are responsible for this task as projects are overseen by programme manager, and benefits are under BCM supervision.”

The Programme Manager ensures that project outputs are delivered on time, within scope, and aligned to programme objectives, while the BCM ensures that these outputs translate into tangible benefits once transitioned into operational use.

This dual responsibility ensures seamless coordination between delivery and realization functions, bridging the gap between project outputs and strategic outcomes. Without this collaboration, there is a risk of projects delivering outputs that fail to produce the intended business improvements.

Together, the Programme Manager and BCM form a critical partnership in MSP’s approach to ensuring benefits are fully realized, tracked, and maximized throughout and beyond the programme lifecycle.

In MSP, threats are negative risks that could impact the programme adversely. Valid responses to threats include Avoiding, Accepting, or Reducing the risk to mitigate potential harm. However, “Enhance” is not a valid response for a threat because it implies increasing the likelihood or impact, which is contrary to risk management objectives.

The MSP Practitioner states:“Threats should be minimized not enhanced,”reinforcing the principle that risk responses should focus on reducing negative effects or avoiding risks altogether. Accepting a risk might be chosen when mitigation is impractical or cost-prohibitive but still requires monitoring.

Understanding and applying appropriate risk responses is vital to effective programme risk management and maintaining control over uncertainties that could derail delivery.

Capital costs are the costs of fixed assets and other tangible assets that are required for the programme. The MSP Practitioner states:“Cost of fixed assets and other assets that are found under 'Technology' head in blueprint is called Capital cost.”This typically includes equipment, buildings, and infrastructure necessary for the programme outputs.

The Benefits Map is typically created during the 'Defining a Programme' phase of the transformational flow. This map visually links programme outputs to expected benefits and outcomes, providing a clear picture of how the programme’s work will realize its intended value.

The MSP Practitioner explains:“Benefits are identified and analyzed in Defining a programme,”which highlights that the Benefits Map is a key planning tool used to understand dependencies, confirm benefit ownership, and ensure alignment with strategic objectives before detailed delivery begins.

Creating the Benefits Map at this stage supports informed decision-making and prioritization, as well as effective communication with stakeholders about how change initiatives contribute to strategic goals. It also serves as a baseline for benefits realization planning and tracking throughout programme delivery.

By defining and mapping benefits early, the programme can mitigate risks of misalignment or overlooked benefits, thereby improving chances of successful transformation and measurable value creation.

The Programme Brief is developed from the Programme Mandate and serves as a foundational input to the Business Case. It contains the programme objectives and expected outcomes, which the Business Case further elaborates. The MSP Practitioner states:“Programme brief contains objectives and outcomes of programme which is further enhanced in Business case.”This positions the Programme Brief as a bridge between initial mandate and detailed justification for the programme.

When a viable Business Case does not emerge, seeking further funding is generallynotconsidered 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.