September 8, 2026 · 7 min read
TL;DR: Workaround appears in seventeen options in this bank and is keyed four times. The condition is narrow enough to memorise. A workaround is keyed when something has already happened and there was no planned response for it, because that combination is precisely what leaves you improvising. It is a distractor when the event has not happened yet, when a planned response already exists, when the cause has not been diagnosed, or when the workaround is being offered as a way to route around a rule rather than a problem.
Candidates lose marks here in both directions. Some never pick a workaround because it sounds unrigorous. Others pick it whenever something goes wrong, which is how you end up improvising a fix for a risk that already had an approved response waiting in the register.
When the problem has occurred and nobody planned for it.
The bank's clearest record puts a project manager in the middle of execution on a demanding software project. A team member reports a problem that has just occurred and was not in the risk register. What is your first action? Keyed is create a workaround, and the explanation gives the reasoning in two clauses: because this is a problem that has already occurred rather than a future risk, there is no need to add it to the risk register, and for a problem the first action is to devise a solution.
Both halves of the trigger appear in that stem. It has already happened, and it was not registered. Take either away and the answer changes.
Take away already happened and you get risk response planning, where a workaround is not even an option because nothing has occurred. Take away not registered and you get one of the bank's most repeated patterns: a supplier quality problem where the risk had been identified earlier in the project. Keyed there is referring to the risk register for the predetermined mitigation actions, and the explanation says why. Because the risk was identified earlier, its response was already analysed and approved, so the project manager executes the planned response rather than improvising a new one.
That is the same event with a different history, and the history is what moves the answer.
You write it down, in two places.
A supplier's shipment is held at customs and the team improvises a temporary substitute part to keep assembly running. The workaround is already working. What next? Keyed is recording the event in the issue log and updating the risk register to reflect what actually occurred.
The explanation splits the two records by job. The issue log captures the customs hold as an event with an owner and an outcome. The risk register update shows what actually occurred against what was anticipated, which informs whether the same exposure needs a planned response next time.
Three distractors sit next to it, and each is a plausible half-measure. Update the risk register only. Take no further action because the workaround resolved the problem. Close the risk register entry because the substitute part means it cannot recur. The last one is the sharpest: a workaround for this occurrence does not eliminate the exposure, and closing the entry throws away the very information the next planning cycle needs.
In four situations, and each removes one half of the trigger above.
| Scenario in the bank | Workaround option offered | What is actually keyed |
|---|---|---|
| Problem just occurred, not in the register | Create a workaround | Create a workaround |
| Supplier quality risk identified earlier | Improvise a response | Execute the risk register's planned mitigation |
| Deliverable misses its performance criterion | Tell the client and propose a workaround | Root cause analysis to find what is limiting it |
| New IT security protocol slows integration | Workshop to find workarounds that keep security | Open a discussion with IT leadership and the team |
| Regulatory requirements missing from the contract | Contact the regulator to find workarounds | Disclose to stakeholders and seek their input |
| Customer supplied data late, sponsor unhappy | Develop a workaround | Log it as an issue and report it in the status report |
| What does a contingency reserve fund? | Workarounds | Active acceptance of identified risks |
The filtration record is worth reading in full. A water-treatment control system reaches acceptance testing at eighty-two per cent recovery against a ninety-five per cent criterion. Informing the client and proposing a workaround sounds responsible and transparent. Keyed is conducting a root cause analysis, and the explanation says a thirteen-point gap could be a commissioning setting, a design limitation or a defective component, and which of those it is decides whether the fix costs a day or reopens the design. Proposing a workaround offers a solution to a problem that has not been diagnosed.
Common trap: the compliance workaround. Two records in this bank offer a workaround as the route around a rule rather than around a problem, once with a regulator and once with a new security protocol, and neither is keyed. In the bridge record, a project manager discovers regulatory and environmental requirements were never reflected in the contract, and one option is to contact the regulatory body directly to find workarounds. Keyed is disclosing what you found to stakeholders and seeking their input. The bank's explanation grounds it in PMI's ethical requirement to comply with applicable laws and regulations. When the obstacle is a rule, the answer is never a way around the rule. The bank offers that distractor by name, and its explanation says why it fails rather than only marking it wrong.
They are neighbours, and the bank tests the seam.
A sponsor is unhappy that a project slipped because the customer failed to supply data on the agreed dates. How could this have been avoided? Developing a workaround is offered. Keyed is recording the late data in the issue log and reporting it to stakeholders in the status report, and the explanation dismisses the workaround in half a sentence: a workaround is a reaction after the delay rather than a way of avoiding it.
That single line generalises well. Workarounds are reactive by definition, so they can never be the answer to a question that asks what you should have done proactively, no matter how sensible the improvisation would have been. If the stem contains the words could have avoided, prevented, or proactive, the workaround option is decorative.
One final placement worth recognising. Asked what a contingency reserve is established to handle, the options include workarounds, passive acceptance, active acceptance and unidentified risks. Keyed is active acceptance. A contingency reserve funds risks that have been identified and analysed, where the project has chosen to accept the threat but funds the consequence so the response is planned rather than improvised. Workarounds are, by definition, the improvised case, and they are what the management reserve rather than the contingency reserve sits behind.
What is a workaround on the PMP exam? An unplanned response to something that has already occurred and had no planned response waiting for it. The bank states this directly: a workaround is an unplanned response to something that has already happened. That is what separates it from implementing a risk response, which executes a plan that was analysed and approved in advance.
When is a workaround the correct answer? When a problem has already occurred and was not in the risk register. The bank keys creating a workaround for a team member reporting a problem that has just occurred and was not registered, and its explanation is explicit that because the problem has already occurred rather than being a future risk, there is no need to add it to the risk register.
What do you do after the workaround is in place? Record it. The bank keys recording the event in the issue log and updating the risk register to reflect what actually occurred. The issue log captures the event with an owner and an outcome; the risk register update informs whether the same exposure needs a planned response next time. Doing nothing because the immediate problem is solved is the distractor.
Why is proposing a workaround wrong when a deliverable fails acceptance testing? Because it offers a solution to a problem nobody has diagnosed. In the bank's filtration record, a package misses its performance criterion and the keyed answer is root cause analysis, since the gap could be a commissioning setting, a design limitation or a defective component, and which one it is decides whether the fix costs a day or reopens the design.
PMP Practice's 2,141 questions are re-certified against PMBOK 8 and the July 2026 Exam Content Outline, with every wrong answer explained, not just marked wrong. Start the free 20-question sample and see how often the difference between two answers is one clause in the stem. No card, no signup required to try it.
What is a workaround on the PMP exam?
An unplanned response to something that has already occurred and had no planned response waiting for it. The bank states this directly: a workaround is an unplanned response to something that has already happened. That is what separates it from implementing a risk response, which executes a plan that was analysed and approved in advance.
When is a workaround the correct answer?
When a problem has already occurred and was not in the risk register. The bank keys creating a workaround for a team member reporting a problem that has just occurred and was not registered, and its explanation is explicit that because the problem has already occurred rather than being a future risk, there is no need to add it to the risk register.
What do you do after the workaround is in place?
Record it. The bank keys recording the event in the issue log and updating the risk register to reflect what actually occurred. The issue log captures the event with an owner and an outcome; the risk register update informs whether the same exposure needs a planned response next time. Doing nothing because the immediate problem is solved is the distractor.
Why is proposing a workaround wrong when a deliverable fails acceptance testing?
Because it offers a solution to a problem nobody has diagnosed. In the bank's filtration record, a package misses its performance criterion and the keyed answer is root cause analysis, since the gap could be a commissioning setting, a design limitation or a defective component, and which one it is decides whether the fix costs a day or reopens the design.