PMP® Cheatsheet — Formulas, Tables, Decision Rules & Glossary

High-yield PMP® review: leadership and stakeholder decision patterns, predictive/agile/hybrid tailoring, key artifacts, schedule and earned value formulas, risk and procurement tables, and a practical glossary.

Use this as your last-mile PMP® review. Pair it with the Syllabus for coverage and Practice for speed.

For exam format and official policy details, see Overview.


PMP in one picture (the exam rewards sequence + trade-offs)

    flowchart TD
	  A["Clarify objective + success criteria"] --> B["Identify stakeholders + constraints"]
	  B --> C["Tailor approach (predictive / agile / hybrid)"]
	  C --> D["Plan (scope / schedule / cost / risk / comms / quality)"]
	  D --> E["Deliver increments + manage change"]
	  E --> F["Measure performance + address issues/risks"]
	  F --> G["Accept + transition + close"]
	  F --> C

If you can state these three items from any question stem, you’re usually close to the best answer:

  • Goal: what outcome is expected (value/benefit)?
  • Constraint: what’s the tightest limit (compliance, time, budget, scope rigidity, risk tolerance)?
  • Next step: what’s missing (facts, approval, artifact, decision)?

“Best answer” elimination rules (fast)

  • If a response implements a change without analysis/approval when governance is implied, it’s often wrong.
  • If the scenario is unclear, “clarify requirements / constraints” usually beats “start building.”
  • If stakeholders disagree, “facilitate alignment” often beats unilateral action.
  • If the team is blocked, remove impediments systemically (root cause), not just by pushing harder.

Tailoring quick guide (predictive vs agile vs hybrid)

SituationTypical fitWhy (concept)
Requirements stable, compliance heavy, fixed scopePredictive / plan-basedupfront baselines + formal control
High uncertainty, learning-driven, fast feedbackAgile / adaptivefrequent inspection + adaptation
Parts stable, parts uncertainHybridgovern stable pieces; iterate where learning is needed

Best-answer pattern: choose the approach that reduces risk fastest and fits constraints (regulatory, stakeholder tolerance, vendor contracts, operational readiness).


People domain: fast tables + playbooks

Conflict management styles (when to use)

StyleWhen it fitsRisk
Collaborate (win-win)complex issues, relationship mattersslower
Compromise (split)time-boxed decisions, equal powermediocre outcomes
Smooth/Accommodatepreserving harmony on low-stakes itemsresentment if overused
Force/Directemergencies, safety/compliance, clear authoritydamages trust
Withdraw/Avoidnot the right time, need more datadelays decisions

Leadership selection (situational)

Team stateBetter approachWhat to do
New / unclearmore directiveclarify goals, roles, next steps
Developingcoachingfeedback + skill building
Performingsupporting/delegatingempower decisions, remove blockers

Emotional intelligence (EI) checklist

  • Name the emotion (self/other) before solving the problem.
  • Ask clarifying questions; don’t assume intent.
  • Reframe from positions (“I need X”) to interests (“I need Y because…”).
  • Close with explicit agreements (owner + date + definition of done).

Process: artifact selection (what the question is really asking)

If the question is about…Reach for…Why (concept)
authorization / authoritycharter (concept)establishes legitimacy and PM authority
included/excluded workscope statement / backlog boundariesprevents uncontrolled expansion
decompositionWBS / backlog breakdownmakes work plan-able
ownershipRACI / role clarityreduces ambiguity
what could go wrongrisk register (concept)proactive responses
current problemissue log (concept)tracked to closure
stakeholder alignmentengagement planintent + cadence
approvals and controlgovernance + change processprevents chaos
acceptanceacceptance criteria + sign-offdefines done

Change control (predictive baseline) — concept flow

    flowchart LR
	  CR["Change request"] --> IA["Impact analysis (scope/schedule/cost/risk/benefits)"]
	  IA --> AP{"Approve?"}
	  AP -->|yes| UP["Update baselines + plans"]
	  UP --> IM["Implement change"]
	  IM --> VR["Verify + validate"]
	  AP -->|no| BK["Backlog / defer / reject"]

Hybrid note: even in agile contexts, some changes still require governance (compliance, budget, vendor scope, major architectural decisions).


Schedule: must-know concepts + formulas

Dependencies (quick recognition)

TypeMeaning
FSsuccessor starts after predecessor finishes
SSsuccessor starts after predecessor starts
FFsuccessor finishes after predecessor finishes
SFsuccessor finishes after predecessor starts

Critical path and float (concept)

  • Critical path: longest path through the network; drives minimum duration.
  • Total float: schedule flexibility for a task without moving project finish.

\[ \text{TF}=LS-ES=LF-EF \]

Three-point (PERT) estimate (concept)

\[ E=\frac{O+4M+P}{6} \]

\[ \sigma=\frac{P-O}{6} \]

Schedule compression (when to choose)

TechniqueWhat it doesRisk
Fast trackingoverlap workmore rework/coordination risk
Crashingadd resourcescost increase; diminishing returns

Earned Value Management (EVM): formulas + meaning

Core variables (concept):

  • PV: planned value
  • EV: earned value
  • AC: actual cost
  • BAC: budget at completion

Variances:

\[ SV=EV-PV \]

\[ CV=EV-AC \]

Indices:

\[ SPI=\frac{EV}{PV} \]

\[ CPI=\frac{EV}{AC} \]

Quick interpretation:

  • \(SPI<1\): behind schedule (value earned vs planned).
  • \(CPI<1\): cost overrun (value earned vs spend).

Common forecasts (concept):

\[ EAC\approx\frac{BAC}{CPI} \]

\[ ETC\approx EAC-AC \]

\[ TCPI\approx\frac{BAC-EV}{BAC-AC} \]

Exam reflex: the math is rarely the finish line—choose an action that addresses root cause (scope clarity, productivity, rework, estimates, impediments).


Risk: response types (threats vs opportunities)

Threat responses (concept): avoid, mitigate, transfer, accept
Opportunity responses (concept): exploit, enhance, share, accept

Risk-first question pattern:

  • If uncertainty is high: prototype / spike / experiment.
  • If impact is high: mitigate early and add contingencies.
  • If unavoidable and catastrophic: avoid (change approach/scope).

Procurement: contract types (risk shifts)

TypeExamplesRisk holder (typical)
Fixed priceFFP, FPIFseller carries cost risk
Time & materialsT&Mbuyer carries cost risk
Cost reimbursableCPFF, CPIF, CPAFbuyer carries most cost risk

Best-answer pattern: pick the contract type that matches requirements certainty and the ability to define scope precisely.


Agile & hybrid quick reference

Scrum essentials (minimum set)

ElementWhat it does
Product backlogordered work/options
Sprint backlogselected work for the iteration
Incrementpotentially shippable result
Definition of Donequality/acceptance bar
Sprint planning / review / retroplan → inspect outcome → improve system

Kanban essentials

  • Visualize workflow, limit WIP, manage flow, make policies explicit, improve collaboratively.
  • Metrics: cycle time, throughput, WIP, lead time.

User story + acceptance criteria (concept)

  • Story: “As a ___, I want ___, so that ___.”
  • Acceptance criteria: clear conditions to verify behavior/outcome.

Business environment: what to anchor

Compliance checklist (concept)

  • Identify applicable policies/regulations and evidence needs.
  • Build compliance into the plan (controls, audits, gated reviews).
  • Treat noncompliance as a risk with consequences, owners, and actions.

Benefits/value checklist (concept)

  • Define benefits and how they’ll be measured.
  • Deliver increments and validate outcomes.
  • If outcomes aren’t appearing, adjust scope/approach (don’t just ship more output).

Glossary (high-yield terms)

TermMeaning (concept)Common trap
Deliverabletangible outputtreating it as the benefit
Outcomechange produced by deliverablesconfusing it with activity completion
Benefitvalue gained from outcomesassuming benefits appear immediately
Riskuncertain event/conditiontreating a current problem as a “risk”
Issuecurrent problempretending it will “maybe” happen later
Assumptionbelieved true for planningforgetting it must be validated
Constrainthard limitignoring it when optimizing
Baselineapproved plan for comparisonchanging it informally
Backlogordered work optionstreating it as a fixed scope contract
Incrementusable slice of productshipping without validation
WIPwork in progressstarting more instead of finishing
Governancedecision rights + controlsconfusing it with bureaucracy