APMG-International Change-Management-Foundation Exam Dumps

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth

In Agile methodology, as covered in the APMG Change Management Foundation, Timeboxes (Option B), also known as sprints in Scrum, are fixed time periods (e.g., 2--4 weeks) during which specific objectives or deliverables are completed. This structured approach ensures focus and progress. Minimum viable product (A) refers to a basic product version, Full transparency (C) to open communication, and Focus on frequent delivery (D) to regular outputs---none inherently involve fixed time periods with completed objectives like Timeboxes.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth

Neuroscience insights in the APMG Change Management Foundation highlight how the brain learns during change. Statement 1 ('Following moments of insight, offer supportive feedback') is true, as research (e.g., Rock's AGES model) shows that reinforcing insights with feedback strengthens neural pathways, aiding learning. Statement 2 ('Positive informative talks from experts') lacks specific neuroscience backing in this context; while informative, it's not highlighted as a key learning enhancer compared to feedback after insight. Thus, only Statement 1 is true.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth

Engagement is a complex, dynamic process in the APMG Change Management Foundation, requiring tailored strategies. Let's dissect each statement with extensive reasoning:

* Statement 1: 'Engaging people in change is simple and routine' -- This is false. The framework stresses that engagement varies by context, stakeholder needs, and change type. For example, engaging a small team in a process tweak differs vastly from a company-wide cultural shift. Emotional reactions, resistance, and diverse motivations make it neither simple nor routine---requiring effort, empathy, and adaptability.

* Statement 2: 'A simple formula can be applied for all change situations' -- This is also false. While principles like Transparency or Dialogue provide guidance, the APMG materials emphasize that no one-size-fits-all formula exists. A top-down announcement might work for a policy update but fail for a system overhaul needing hands-on involvement. Complexity and uniqueness of each change defy a universal approach.

Both statements oversimplify engagement, contradicting the APMG view that it's a nuanced, situation-specific challenge. Option D is correct, as neither holds true given the framework's focus on flexibility and depth in stakeholder engagement.

Comprehensive and Detailed In-Depth

The APMG Change Management Foundation draws on French and Raven's Five Bases of Power to explain influence in change contexts. Referent power (Option D) arises from admiration, respect, and identification with an individual, often because they are seen as a role model. A manager who is admired and respected fits this description, as their influence stems from personal charisma and positive relationships rather than formal authority. Legitimate power (A) comes from a formal position, Reward power (B) from the ability to give benefits, and Coercive power (C) from punishment---none of which rely on admiration or role-model status.

According to Herzberg's research, job satisfaction and dissatisfaction are influenced by two different sets of factors: motivators and hygiene factors. Motivators are factors that lead to high job satisfaction and motivation, such as achievement, recognition, responsibility, advancement, and growth. Hygiene factors are factors that do not cause satisfaction, but can cause dissatisfaction if they are absent or inadequate, such as working conditions, salary, security, and supervision. Therefore, responsibility is a motivator that leads to high job satisfaction. Reference: https://apmg-international.com/sites/default/files/Change%20Management%20Foundation%20Sample%20Paper%2016%20-%20v1.0.pdf (page 11)