Roles & Organisation
35 practice questions with explanations — 15 free to try
PassNova has 35 MSP Practitioner practice questions on Roles & Organisation, each with a clear explanation. A 15-question taster is free with no sign-up; the full bank is part of PassNova Premium. Updated for 2026.
Roles & Organisation: example questions & answers
3 worked examples with answers and explanations below. Try 15 MSP Practitioner questions free in the browser; the full 35-question Roles & Organisation bank is part of PassNova Premium.
A large-scale rail signalling programme is running into repeated funding disputes because three different directors each claim partial ownership of the business case, and none will make a final call on trade-offs between cost and schedule. What does MSP recommend to resolve this structurally?
- AEscalate every cost and schedule trade-off to an external assurance reviewer instead, and treat that reviewer's ruling as binding on all three directors
- BSplit the business case into three separate documents so that each of the three directors can approve their own share of the funding
- CAppoint a single Senior Responsible Owner with ultimate accountability and business case ownership to make such trade-off decisions✓
- DAsk the programme office to decide, since it is neutral
Answer: MSP places ultimate accountability for the programme, including ownership of the business case, with a single Senior Responsible Owner precisely to avoid the diffusion of responsibility and unresolved trade-offs seen when accountability is shared across several directors.
A programme's SRO is heavily involved in checking detailed project schedules and reviewing individual task-level Gantt charts every week, leaving little time for stakeholder engagement with the wider organisation. Is this the most appropriate use of the SRO's time under MSP, and why?
- ANo, because the SRO should delegate all schedule oversight to the programme office and have no visibility of it
- BYes, because detailed scheduling is the SRO's core accountability
- CYes, because the SRO must approve every task in every project plan
- DNo, because detailed task-level scheduling is normally the Programme Manager's responsibility; the SRO should focus on strategic accountability, direction and senior stakeholder engagement✓
Answer: MSP separates the SRO's strategic accountability, direction-setting and senior stakeholder engagement from the Programme Manager's day-to-day management, which includes detailed scheduling; an SRO absorbed in task-level Gantt charts is misapplying the role and neglecting its intended focus.
Midway through a programme, the SRO leaves the organisation and a gap of three months occurs before a successor is appointed, during which no one has authority to approve the business case or make strategic trade-off decisions. What does this gap most clearly illustrate about the SRO role?
- AThat the programme office should take on business case ownership in the interim, since it holds all of the programme's information and can keep decisions moving while the post remains vacant
- BThat the role is unnecessary once a business case is approved
- CThat the Programme Manager should permanently absorb SRO accountability
- DThat accountability for the programme and its business case sits specifically with the SRO, and a prolonged vacancy leaves the programme without the authority needed for key decisions✓
Answer: Because MSP vests ultimate accountability and business case ownership specifically in the SRO, a prolonged vacancy in that single role leaves a genuine gap in authority for strategic decisions that cannot simply be absorbed by other roles without formal reappointment.