A project manager believes that modifying the scope of the project may provide added value for the customer. The project manager should:

Question

Options

• AChange the project's objectives
• BCall a meeting of the configuration control board
• CPostpone the modification until a separate enhancement project is funded after this project is
• DChange the scope baseline
• EPrepare a variance report

• A
  5% (2)
• B
  8% (3)
• C
  70% (26)
• D
  14% (5)
• E
  3% (1)

Explanation

Option C is correct because scope changes during an active project must go through formal change control processes - and if the proposed modification is truly a scope expansion for added value (not a fix), the proper approach is to defer it to a separate, properly funded effort rather than absorbing it into the current project mid-stream. This protects the current project's baseline and ensures new work is properly scoped, budgeted, and authorized.

Why the distractors are wrong:

• A (Change objectives): Objectives define what the project achieves at a high level; you don't change objectives simply because scope might expand - that bypasses formal change control entirely.
• B (Configuration control board): The CCB handles configuration items (often used in IT/engineering contexts for managing product baselines), not scope change decisions - that's the Change Control Board's domain, and even then, a PM alone shouldn't be calling that meeting just based on a personal belief.
• D (Change the scope baseline): You cannot unilaterally change the scope baseline; it requires an approved change request through the integrated change control process.
• E (Variance report): A variance report documents deviations between planned and actual performance - it's a monitoring/reporting tool, not a mechanism for proposing scope changes.

Memory tip: Think "believe ≠ approve." A PM's personal belief that scope might add value is not sufficient justification to modify an active project. When in doubt on exam questions, protect the current project's integrity and defer enhancement ideas to future funded work.

No community discussion yet for this question.