Programme module · Kent Business College
PMP module 1: build stakeholder relationships, negotiate decisions and turn project evidence into useful reporting across 14 weekly online sessions.
Make project communication useful to the people who must act on it. Stakeholder Management, Communications and Reporting is the first module of KBC’s two-module PMP preparation route. It develops the relationships, shared understanding and evidence-based reporting on which reliable project decisions depend.
Begin by understanding who is affected, who provides information and who has authority. Then practise listening, negotiation, constructive challenge and audience-specific reporting. By the end, your stakeholder map, engagement plan and decision brief should form a coherent response to a real project need.
Teaching is delivered by Kent Business College, UK, through 14 weekly online sessions of two hours: 28 live teaching hours. Reading, quizzes and progressive applied work support the sessions. The full PMP route continues with Project Planning, Scheduling and Integrated Controls, which uses the requirements and decision context established here.
Explore the focus and practical output of each teaching session. Open individual sessions below, or expand the complete plan.
Distinguish project outputs from intended outcomes, requirements from preferred solutions, and authority from influence. Use a bounded project to explain the sponsor, decision owner, constraints and acceptance criteria in plain English.
Practical output: A project-context statement, key definitions and an initial learning reflection.
Identify affected people, information providers and decision-makers. Compare influence and interest with legitimacy, urgency and dependency, and explain whose perspective a single stakeholder matrix could miss.
Practical output: A dated stakeholder map with a rationale and a record of missing voices.
Practise interviewing, listening and summarising back. Turn broad requests into specific information needs and acceptance conditions, distinguishing preferences from essential requirements and making uncertainty visible.
Practical output: Interview questions and a checked stakeholder-needs summary.
Match the format, detail, frequency and channel to the decision or relationship need. Consider a sponsor brief, technical discussion and accessible visual summary, including time zones and different participation needs.
Practical output: An audience-specific communication and engagement plan.
Design a discussion that surfaces assumptions and draws in relevant expertise. Practise useful questions, balanced participation and accurate summarising, then use observation and feedback to improve your facilitation.
Practical output: A meeting design and a feedback-informed facilitation review.
Separate consultation, recommendation, approval and accountability. Follow an urgent scope request through the appropriate people and identify when a responsibility matrix needs a clearer decision owner.
Practical output: A responsibility map, escalation route and concise decision record.
Explore interests beneath stated positions and compare responses to disagreement. Practise challenging a weak assumption using evidence, while recognising the limits of informal negotiation and the need for escalation.
Practical output: A reasoned response to a disagreement and an updated engagement action.
Inspect a project dataset for missing dates, inconsistent status definitions and outdated claims. Distinguish observation, interpretation and assumption, and decide which messages the available evidence can support.
Practical output: A checked evidence extract with source, date and qualification notes.
Create a concise report that names the decision, explains options and shows the consequence of acting or waiting. Adapt the presentation for a package manager, sponsor or governance audience without changing the underlying facts.
Practical output: A one-page decision brief with a clear recommendation and assumptions.
Test whether a message has been understood and whether an engagement approach is working. Use feedback to revise the plan and explain why some requests are adopted while others need a different response.
Practical output: A revised engagement plan showing the feedback and the resulting change.
Consider how hierarchy, confidence and remote working affect who contributes. Design accessible meetings, advance information and follow-up so that colleagues can raise concerns and provide useful challenge.
Practical output: An inclusive participation plan with explicit questions and follow-up responsibilities.
Respond to an apparently positive project status whose supporting evidence is incomplete. Communicate the concern proportionately, identify what needs checking and defend the escalation to a questioning sponsor.
Practical output: A difficult-message briefing and an evidence-based escalation recommendation.
Bring the stakeholder map, decision rights, engagement plan, reporting specification and decision brief together. Check their consistency and explain the alternatives you rejected when selecting your approach.
Practical output: A complete communication evidence pack and a professional presentation.
Revise the pack after challenge, revisit earlier concepts through scenario questions and identify a meaningful workplace application. Translate stakeholder needs into the scope, acceptance and reporting requirements that Module 2 will develop.
Practical output: A revised pack, learning priorities and a clear handover into integrated controls.
Apply the learning
Select an authorised workplace communication need or an approved teaching case. Analyse stakeholders, establish the decisions they need to make, design an engagement approach and create a reporting specification. Develop at least two meaningful audience-specific communications, gather feedback where the context permits and show how your approach changes. Defend your recommendation through a short professional presentation.
Use anonymised, public or suitable synthetic material where workplace information is confidential. The issued assessment brief confirms the required evidence.
Teaching and the relevant course certificate are provided through Kent Business College in the UK. A Kent Business College course certificate is distinct from a separate professional-body qualification or examination. Eligibility, the exact award and any examination inclusions are confirmed for the chosen route.
A request to “keep the sponsor informed” is a starting point, not a reporting specification. You learn to ask what decision is approaching, what the sponsor needs to understand and when the information will be useful. This changes the choice of content, format and channel.
Consider a proposed dashboard that an operations manager rejects. The initial response might be to improve its appearance. A stronger investigation asks whether it answers the manager’s real question, whether the data can be trusted and whether the reporting rhythm fits the work. The module develops that habit of enquiry before prescription.
The curriculum develops a cumulative pack, with each stage requiring you to revisit earlier decisions. Early work clarifies the project language and your own understanding. Later work applies an engagement approach, examines the evidence behind a recommendation and integrates the outputs into a defensible whole.
This progression creates a useful feedback record. If an interview exposes a missing stakeholder, the map changes. If a reporting trial creates confusion, the specification changes. Your final explanation shows the connection between what you learned and what you improved.
Explain the context, stakeholder groups and key concepts. Identify what your initial learning has clarified.
Develop and justify a communication or engagement intervention for the selected need.
Create a decision brief, assess its sources and improve it after feedback.
Defend the complete pack and identify a specific application or requirement for Module 2.
The report should distinguish a measured result from an interpretation. You examine dates, definitions, completeness and source reliability before deciding what the evidence supports. The same facts can be presented at different levels of detail, but the underlying message must remain consistent.
A difficult message may require you to challenge an apparently favourable status. You practise explaining the concern, the uncertainty and the next action without exaggerating the claim. Success is judged by the quality of the reasoning and the usefulness of the recommendation, not simply the confidence of the presentation.
The subject connects to KBC’s PMO Module 4, Stakeholder Management, Communications and Reporting. Its assessment structure contains a critical knowledge essay and a professional-practice portfolio, each weighted 50%. This is a separate assessment numbering system: the subject is PMP Module 1 in the teaching sequence.
The knowledge work compares stakeholder models and reporting approaches, then recommends an arrangement that supports assurance, portfolio priorities and benefits. The practice work demonstrates an implemented engagement approach, communications for different audiences, feedback and adaptation. The issued cohort brief sets the exact question, word count and marking criteria.
Where the same workplace material also contributes to a Project Controls Professional evidence bank, keep the factual account and the PMO reflective commentary clearly separated. Common artefacts may support different routes, but each route needs its own mapping and assessment decision.
Presentation is one element. The wider focus is understanding stakeholders, assigning decision responsibilities, selecting evidence, designing engagement and evaluating whether communication supports useful action.
Yes. Sessions include disagreement, negotiation, constructive challenge, unwelcome performance information and escalation. You explain why your response is appropriate and adapt it after feedback.
An approved case can support course learning. Authentic workplace evidence is required where your separate qualification or apprenticeship assessment specifies it. KBC confirms the appropriate route for your circumstances.
The stakeholder needs, success criteria, decision rights and reporting requirements become inputs to Module 2’s scope, baseline and control arrangements. The later performance report returns to the audiences identified here.
No. It is the first 28-hour module of KBC’s two-module preparation route. KBC course completion and PMI certification have separate requirements, and your accepted education evidence is confirmed for the complete route.
Further reading and programme references · reviewed 18 October 2026
