Question about changes

Submitted by GSA on Fri, 08/30/2013 - 19:31

Question:

You are completing the work defined in the project scope statement of a new software development project when a team member points out that you have an opportunity to deliver enhanced capability to the client at no extra cost, time, or risk to the project.

What should you do next?


Choices:

A. Assess the change through the change control process and, if approved, amend the project scope statement.

B. Decline to make the changes and proceed to deliver exactly what the scope statement sets out.

C. Make the changes and surprise the client with the extra capability.

D. Ask the team member to keep quiet about the changes and ignore his request because it presents too many risks to the project.


 

Forums: 
PMP / CAPM exam Question bank
  • Log in to post comments
  • 796 reads

sheeraz

Fri, 08/30/2013 - 20:03

As the project is ending and the project manager should be smart enought to evaluate the change. and Decline to make the changes..

ppalkonda1975

Fri, 08/30/2013 - 21:36

 It is B as gold plating should not be allowed in the project and the scenario talks abt gold plating

antonyvd

Sat, 08/31/2013 - 09:48

 The answer is 'B' .If we are adding extra features to the product that is not mentioned in the project scope statement it will become gold plating and is prohibited as per PMI.

GSA

Sat, 08/31/2013 - 11:23

Thanks for the feedback. A is the answer according to the author.

Below is his explanation:

This is an issue about "gold plating," which, in effect, means you are delivering more than what you were required to do. Although this sounds like a good thing to do, it also means you are not delivering what has been documented. There are no problems with seizing the opportunity to deliver more, but you must always be delivering what is agreed and documented. Therefore, in this case, you would formally assess the change; if your change control process accepts it, you would then amend the necessary documents so that at all times you are delivering exactly what is documented.

If you can assess the request and approve it through your approved change control process, there is no reason simply to decline it. You should always look for ways to deliver more than what was expected as long as it is documented.

The first step before making the changes and surprising the client with the extra capability is to assess the change through your change control process.

If you can assess the request and approve it through your approved change control process, there is no reason simply to decline it. You should always look for ways to deliver more than what was expected as long as it is documented.
 

Bart

Sat, 08/31/2013 - 14:38

 

Just thought I'd share my thoughts on how I arrived at the answer.  Sometimes I have to go through a process of elimination to arrive at the correct answer.  As I understand it, PMI will have two 'correct' answers, but one is more 'correct' than another.  Sometimes, working backwards works better for me.
 
Whenever I see a response like D, which is clearly unethical, I look to the Code of Ethics (http://www.pmi.org/codeofethicsPDF) to try and answer the question.
 
In this case, I worked backwards and eliminated answers that go against the code. I believe the pertinent standards of conduct for this question are:
 
4.2.1 - We demonstrate transparency in our decision-making process
 
4.2.3 - We provide equal access to information to those who are authorized to have that information.
 
5.3.1 - We do not engage in or condone behavior that is designed to deceive others, including but not limited to, making misleading or false statements, stating half-truths, providing information out of context or withholding information that, if known, would render our statements as misleading or incomplete.
 
With those in mind, I went through each answer and asked myself if it’s in adherence with the code.
 
There is nothing that goes against the code in answer A, so I move on to the next – keeping A in mind as a possible correct answer.
 
B doesn’t seem unethical, but it seems to violate standard 4.2.1. So I keep that answer in mind as a possibility.
 
C appears to violate 4.2.3. You never want to surprise the customer with changes they know nothing about. In my opinion, this is a bad answer and should be discarded.
 
D clearly violates 4.2.3 and 5.3.1. You never want to purposely hide information from team mates, stakeholders, or the customer – or ask others to do so on your behalf.
 
So of the available answers, I immediately discounted responses C and D. And while both A and B appear to be correct, A is *more* correct than B because it is clear and follows the standard processes, while B has the appearance of violating 4.2.1.

 

Focused2013

Tue, 09/03/2013 - 11:13

 The key point here is that it was run through the change control board which would have analyzed the impact on scope, schedule, and budget. I agree it does fall under gold plating.