While stakeholder feedback is critical, project changes must be managed formally to avoid scope creep. The correct first step is to document the concern as an issue or potential change request. This triggers the established change control process, ensuring the impact on scope, schedule, cost, and other constraints is evaluated before any action is taken.

Fast-tracking involves performing activities in parallel that were originally scheduled in sequence. This can shorten the project duration without necessarily increasing cost, though it may increase risk. Crashing (adding resources) typically increases cost, and scope reduction changes the project’s agreed-upon deliverables, which should follow a formal change process.

For dispersed teams, transparency and asynchronous access to information are key. A shared, real-time collaboration tool (e.g., Jira, Trello, MS Planner) provides a single source of truth for task status, ownership, and progress. Establishing norms for its use (e.g., updating status daily) promotes accountability and reduces misunderstandings more effectively than periodic meetings or one-way emails.

The loss of institutional knowledge is a common project risk. The professional approach is to formally identify and analyze this new risk via the risk register. A contingency plan (like pairing the new hire with a subject matter expert or scheduling knowledge transfer sessions) can then be developed. The other options are potential responses, but they should be evaluated and formalized as part of the risk management process.

A contingency reserve (or contingency budget) is an allocated amount within the cost baseline to cover identified risks (known-unknowns), like specific material price fluctuations. The management reserve is for unknown-unknowns and is not part of the performance measurement baseline. Direct and indirect costs are categories of planned costs, not reserves for uncertainty.

The project charter, formally authorized by the sponsor, is the foundational document that provides the project manager with authority. It contains the project’s purpose, high-level objectives, key stakeholders, and boundaries. It is the ideal document to socialize at kick-off to align everyone before diving into detailed plans.

The project manager must first assess the situation. Analyzing the impact (schedule float, effect on dependencies, total project delay) provides the factual basis for any subsequent action, whether it’s negotiating with the vendor, implementing a schedule compression technique, or communicating with stakeholders. Communication is vital, but it should be based on a clear understanding of the impact.

Corrective action is taken to fix an existing defect or non-conformity and to eliminate its cause, preventing recurrence. Here, the defect (faulty units) exists, and the action (fixing the machine) addresses the root cause. Preventive action aims to prevent a potential future defect. Quality Control finds the defects; Quality Assurance audits the process.

In agile frameworks, new requirements are welcomed but managed through the product backlog. The product owner is responsible for prioritizing backlog items. The request should be added to the backlog, and its priority relative to other items will be assessed in the next grooming or planning session. This maintains agility while preventing disruptive mid-sprint changes.

While stakeholder feedback is critical, project changes must be managed formally to avoid scope creep. The correct first step is to document the concern as an issue or potential change request. This triggers the established change control process, ensuring the impact on scope, schedule, cost, and other constraints is evaluated before any action is taken.0