Which is the reason to defer start of an architecture engagement with a retail industry customer?

Question

Options

• AYou do not know this year's budget for network upgrades
• BA start-up which sells sensors for supply chain processes is rumored to be on Cisco's acquisition
• CThe company at risk for regulatory fines,due to a security breach one of their alliance partners
• DA new CIO has been announced,and will start in 2 months.You have access to other IT senior

• A
  5% (1)
• B
  9% (2)
• C
  14% (3)
• D
  73% (16)

Explanation

Option D is correct because beginning a major architecture engagement without the incoming CIO's involvement is a significant risk - the CIO owns the technology strategy, budget authority, and organizational direction. Starting now could result in work that the new CIO rejects, redirects, or deprioritizes, wasting both time and credibility. Deferring allows you to align with the person who will ultimately champion and approve the engagement.

Why the distractors are wrong:

• A - Not knowing the network upgrade budget is a gap, but it's a common starting condition; engagements regularly begin during budget planning cycles and help inform budget decisions.
• B - An unconfirmed rumor of an acquisition is too speculative to justify deferral; you act on confirmed information, not market gossip.
• C - A partner's security breach actually creates urgency to engage, not a reason to defer - the customer likely needs architectural guidance on risk and compliance immediately.

Memory tip: Use the phrase "No sponsor, no start." A new CIO represents a leadership vacuum at the top of IT. Just like you wouldn't build a house without the homeowner present to approve the blueprint, you don't launch a strategic architecture engagement without the executive who will own it.

No community discussion yet for this question.