Oracle Project Management Cloud 2025 Implementation Professional—Delta Advanced Practice Exam: Hard Questions 2025

After enabling new Project Foundation capabilities, an implementation team introduces additional descriptive flexfields (DFFs) on the Project and Task objects. In test, users can enter values, but downstream integrations and reports intermittently show blanks even though the UI displays values. The issue is most frequent for newly created tasks generated by a template with copied attributes. What is the most likely root cause and best-practice fix?

A global services organization uses project templates and enterprise structures. They recently reorganized the enterprise and introduced a new business unit for a subset of delivery. Newly created projects correctly inherit the new BU and legal entity mapping, but copied projects from older templates retain old defaults for roles, classifications, and certain project-level controls, leading to inconsistent governance. What is the best architectural approach to prevent legacy template artifacts from propagating while minimizing user disruption?

In a deployment using complex project security, a customer wants external collaborators to update task progress but not see project financials. After configuration, collaborators can update progress in the task UI, but they can still access a financial page through deep-link navigation and can export certain financial fields via OTBI. What is the most effective remediation that aligns with Oracle best practices?

A customer uses budgetary control and creates baseline budgets and forecasts. They notice that after importing expenditure items from an external time system, some costs fail budgetary control unexpectedly, even though the overall project still has sufficient funds. Investigation shows the failures cluster around tasks with shared resources and mixed funding sources. Which design choice most likely caused this and what is the best fix?

A firm bills customers using a mix of fixed price and time-and-materials within the same contract. During month-end, revenue recognition is off because certain labor transactions are excluded from invoice generation but still recognized as revenue. The customer wants invoice and revenue inclusion rules to be consistent while still allowing exceptions for a small subset of internal time. What is the most robust configuration approach?

A customer’s costing results differ between two otherwise identical projects. Both use the same expenditure type and cost rate schedule, but one project applies a different burdened cost. The only known difference is that one project has multiple task-level organizations and the other does not. Which advanced troubleshooting path is most likely to identify the root cause?

During an integration of external procurement costs into PPM, imported supplier costs are costed correctly but fail to become billable on T&M contracts. The transactions have project and task, but the expenditure item date is set to the invoice date rather than the receipt date. Only some lines are impacted, mainly those crossing rate changes. What is the most plausible cause and the best corrective action?

A PMO wants capacity planning to reflect both named resources and generic roles. They also want to prevent overcommitment by ensuring hard allocations take priority, while still allowing soft allocations to be used for scenario planning. In practice, the schedule shows availability but assignment requests are being rejected for resources who are only soft-allocated elsewhere. What configuration and process design best matches the requirement?

In a matrix organization, resource managers complain that capacity is overstated because planned absences and corporate training are not considered, leading to systematic over-allocation. The enterprise uses HR absence management and a learning system, but does not want to build heavy custom integrations. What is the best approach to improve capacity realism with minimal customization and strong governance?

Executives want an AI-assisted project health summary that flags schedule risk, cost risk, and resourcing risk, and they want drill-through to supporting metrics. Early pilots show inconsistent AI summaries: two users viewing the same project get different narratives, and some summaries cite outdated baseline dates. What is the best implementation strategy to increase consistency, auditability, and trust in the AI outputs?