This situation represents a potential threat to the project’s Business Case (continued business justification). The Project Manager’s first responsibility is to assess the impact on the project’s objectives and viability. This assessment is crucial information for the Project Board, who are responsible for ensuring the project remains justified and must decide on the appropriate response (e.g., pausing, changing scope). Simply logging the risk (A) or pausing work (C) are reactive steps that should follow the Board’s direction. Updating the plan (D) is premature before understanding the full impact.

The product does not meet its agreed specifications (the latest standards), so it is an ‘off-specification’ and should be rejected. An off-specification is a type of issue in PRINCE2. Therefore, the Issue Register must be updated to formally capture this deviation from the baseline. A concession (B) is for accepting a product that does not meet specifications, which is not appropriate here as it’s a fundamental compliance failure. The Quality Register (A) records check activities and results, but the formal management of the deviation is via the Issue Register. Option C violates the ‘focus on products’ and ‘manage by exception’ principles.

The forecast breach of a stage tolerance (time tolerance of 1 week vs. a 2-week delay) is a clear trigger for an exception. The Project Manager must follow the ‘manage by exception’ principle by escalating this to the Project Board via an Exception Report. The Board then decides on the appropriate response (e.g., give an exception plan, amend tolerances, or stop the project). The Project Manager cannot unilaterally re-plan the stage (B) or use the risk budget (D) if it causes a tolerance breach. A contingency plan (A) would only be used if the risk had been identified and planned for in advance.

The End Stage Report is a key decision document for the Project Board. While reporting on stage performance is important, the materialization of a major risk with high impact is a significant event that threatens the ongoing validity of the Business Case (continued business justification). The report must provide a balanced view, but the primary purpose is to inform the Board’s decision about the next stage. Therefore, this major change in project context must be the focal point, as it may lead the Board to reconsider the project’s viability, not just its plan. Options A, C, and D fail to give this critical development the emphasis it requires for informed governance.

A forecast breach of a stage tolerance (cost tolerance here) is an exception. PRINCE2’s ‘manage by exception’ principle requires the Project Manager to formally escalate this to the Project Board. The specific management product for this purpose is an Exception Report. This report outlines the exception, its causes, options for resolution, and a recommendation. An Issue Report (D) is for recording issues, but a tolerance breach requires the specific escalation mechanism of the Exception Report. Updating the Stage Plan (A) or sending a Checkpoint Report (B) are internal management actions that do not fulfill the governance requirement to inform the Board of the exception.

PRINCE2 emphasizes tailoring controls to suit the project’s needs and stakeholders. The Project Manager’s role is to facilitate an agreement among the Project Board members (Executive, Senior User, Senior Supplier) on the appropriate level of control. The agreed approach for all communication, including reporting frequency, format, and recipients, is formally documented in the Communication Management Strategy, which is created during the initiation stage. The Project Plan (B) contains the schedule and costs, not detailed control procedures. Simply siding with one board member (A) or deferring the decision (D) does not demonstrate effective stakeholder management or the establishment of clear project controls.

PRINCE2 requires quality criteria to be measurable. Vague terms like ‘enjoyed’ are not measurable and will lead to disputes during quality checking and product acceptance. The Project Manager’s role is to work with the Senior User to translate their needs into specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART) quality criteria. Option B correctly refines the subjective desire into an objective, measurable criterion that can be verified. Simply accepting it (A) creates future problems. Making it a ‘desirable’ (C) still leaves it undefined. Logging it as a risk (D) is a secondary action; the primary action is to define quality properly.

A key purpose of the Closing a Project process is to ensure the organization is prepared to measure the project’s intended benefits after it has closed. The Benefits Review Plan (created during initiation) outlines how and when benefits will be measured. The Project Manager must ensure this plan is finalized, agreed upon by corporate management (e.g., the Business Change function), and handed over for execution. This is a crucial link between project delivery and the realization of business value. While archiving (C) is important, it is an administrative task. Transferring issues (A) is part of handover but not the primary link to benefits. Planning a post-project review (B) is part of the Benefits Review Plan, not a separate activity.

Any proposed change to baseline products (scope, time, cost, quality, benefits, risk) is captured as an issue in PRINCE2. The fact that it is within tolerance does not give the Project Manager authority to approve it; tolerances are for managing approved work, not for approving changes. The Project Manager must follow the change control procedure: capture it, assess its impact (including on the Business Case), and then take it to the authority level defined in the Change Control Approach (likely the Project Board for a significant change) for a decision. The Board may then approve it, reject it, or request more information.

This situation represents a potential threat to the project’s Business Case (continued business justification). The Project Manager’s first responsibility is to assess the impact on the project’s objectives and viability. This assessment is crucial information for the Project Board, who are responsible for ensuring the project remains justified and must decide on the appropriate response (e.g., pausing, changing scope). Simply logging the risk (A) or pausing work (C) are reactive steps that should follow the Board’s direction. Updating the plan (D) is premature before understanding the full impact.0