PfMP Cheat Sheet

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

For domain weights and exam structure notes, see Overview.

---

Portfolio management in one picture (strategy → decisions → outcomes)

    flowchart TD
	  A["Strategic goals + constraints"] --> B["Prioritization criteria + scoring"]
	  B --> C["Portfolio scenarios (what-if)"]
	  C --> D["Roadmap + sequencing + dependencies"]
	  D --> E["Governance decisions + thresholds"]
	  E --> F["Monitor portfolio health + benefits"]
	  F --> G["Rebalance + reallocate + update roadmap"]
	  G --> C

Best-answer reflex: choose the next step that keeps decisions traceable to strategy, governed by thresholds, and validated by measurable portfolio outcomes.

What the exam is really asking

---

Program vs project vs portfolio (fast distinctions)

---

High-yield portfolio artifacts (what the question is really asking)

---

Prioritization: quick scoring model rules

• Don’t double-count: if “strategic fit” already includes “customer value”, don’t score it twice.
• Separate mandatory constraints (must comply) from value criteria (how good).
• Use sensitivity checks: if small weight tweaks flip the ranking, your decision is fragile.

Value scoring (concept):

\[ \text{Score}=\sum_{i=1}^{n} w_i\cdot s_i \]

Where \(w_i\) is the weight and \(s_i\) is the standardized score for criterion \(i\).

---

Scenario analysis (what-if) — checklist

• Define constraints: budget, capacity, deadlines, regulatory must-dos.
• Build alternatives: baseline, constrained, aggressive, risk-reduced.
• Compare: value, risk, feasibility, dependency stress, benefits timing.
• Decide: recommend + justify + identify what must change.

Common “portfolio viable” questions:

• What happens if funding is cut by 15%?
• What is the impact of delaying a dependency-heavy component?
• Which scenario maximizes benefits under capacity constraints?

Rebalance versus hold

---

Portfolio roadmap: dependency thinking

    flowchart LR
	  S["Strategic priority"] --> A["Component A"]
	  S --> B["Component B"]
	  A --> C["Shared platform enablement"]
	  B --> C
	  C --> D["Benefits realized"]

If a shared dependency is late, “just start everything” is rarely correct; you often need sequencing changes, contingency plans, or scope trade-offs.

---

Portfolio health (what to watch)

Leading indicators:

• capacity utilization and bottlenecks
• dependency slippage and integration readiness
• risk exposure trending up
• benefit adoption signals lagging

Lagging indicators:

• budget variance trends
• schedule variance trends
• realized benefit vs target

---

Simple value formulas (portfolio-friendly)

ROI (concept):

\[ \text{ROI}=\frac{\text{Net Benefit}}{\text{Cost}} \]

NPV (concept):

\[ \text{NPV}=\sum_{t=0}^{T}\frac{CF_t}{(1+r)^t} \]

Benefit-cost ratio (BCR), concept:

\[ \text{BCR}=\frac{\text{PV(Benefits)}}{\text{PV(Costs)}} \]

Expected monetary value (EMV), concept:

\[ \text{EMV}=\sum p_i\cdot I_i \]

Where \(p_i\) is probability and \(I_i\) is impact.

---

Portfolio risk register: minimum fields

Reserve logic (concept): base reserves on aggregate exposure and governance-approved thresholds, not on “whatever is left in the budget.”

---

Communications: credibility rules (fast)

• If you can’t trace a claim back to a data source, don’t publish it.
• If governance decided X, comms must reflect X consistently across audiences.
• Always include: impacts, decisions needed, and next steps.

Fast elimination rules

• Prioritization logic that ignores constraints is usually weak.
• Portfolio health reporting with no decision consequence is usually weak.
• A rebalancing answer that protects sunk cost over strategic fit is usually weak.
• If a dependency-heavy component slips, “continue as planned” is usually weak.

---

Glossary (high-yield terms)