Refer to the Project Charter document where it defines scope clearly, including detail deliverables, exclusions, timelines, and approval processes. What is the recommended practice to manage changes?

Refer to the Project Charter document where it defines scope clearly, including detail deliverables, exclusions, timelines, and approval processes. What is the recommended practice to manage changes?

• A. Require justification, impact analysis, and approvals
• B. Communicate boundaries by helping stakeholders understand what's in and out of scope
• C. Rely on memory of previous projects
• D. Delay all changes until after launch

Answer: (A)

Formal change control is the practice being tested. When a change to scope, deliverables, timeline, or budget is proposed, it should be justified, analyzed for its impact, and require approval before being put into action. This approach helps preserve the project baseline defined in the charter, ensuring that any deviation is deliberate, documented, and agreed upon by the right stakeholders. The justification explains why the change is needed and aligns it with business value. The impact analysis looks at how the change affects scope, schedule, cost, quality, resources, and risk, so decisions are data-driven rather than reactive. Approvals ensure governance and accountability, often involving a change control board or designated authority. Once approved, updates are made to the project management plan and other baselines, and changes are communicated to the team and stakeholders. Other options fall short because merely communicating what’s in or out of scope doesn’t govern how changes are handled, relying on memory from past projects is unsafe and unreliable for current decisions, and delaying all changes until after launch ignores the reality that changes are often necessary and should be managed through a formal process.

Formal change control is the practice being tested. When a change to scope, deliverables, timeline, or budget is proposed, it should be justified, analyzed for its impact, and require approval before being put into action. This approach helps preserve the project baseline defined in the charter, ensuring that any deviation is deliberate, documented, and agreed upon by the right stakeholders.

The justification explains why the change is needed and aligns it with business value. The impact analysis looks at how the change affects scope, schedule, cost, quality, resources, and risk, so decisions are data-driven rather than reactive. Approvals ensure governance and accountability, often involving a change control board or designated authority. Once approved, updates are made to the project management plan and other baselines, and changes are communicated to the team and stakeholders.

Other options fall short because merely communicating what’s in or out of scope doesn’t govern how changes are handled, relying on memory from past projects is unsafe and unreliable for current decisions, and delaying all changes until after launch ignores the reality that changes are often necessary and should be managed through a formal process.