Who or what should always be informed in case a release is rejected, delayed or cancelled?

Question

Options

• ABusiness relationship management
• BChange management
• CIncident management
• DThe senior management representative

• A
  2% (1)
• B
  81% (44)
• C
  11% (6)
• D
  6% (3)

Explanation

Change management must always be informed when a release is rejected, delayed, or cancelled because releases are authorized through the change management process - any deviation from the approved plan (rejection, delay, or cancellation) directly affects the change record and may require the change to be re-evaluated, rescheduled, or closed. Without this notification, change management cannot maintain accurate records or coordinate dependent activities.

A (Business relationship management) is wrong because BRM focuses on the strategic relationship between the service provider and customers, not on the operational coordination of release outcomes. C (Incident management) is wrong because incident management deals with unplanned interruptions, not the planned lifecycle of releases - a cancelled release is not an incident. D (Senior management representative) is wrong because escalation to senior management is not a standard notification requirement for every release status change; that would be an exception, not a rule.

Memory tip: Think of change management as the "gatekeeper" - it owns the authorization to proceed, so it must also own the knowledge of when plans change. If the gate was opened (change approved), change management must know if the door never got used.

No community discussion yet for this question.