mediumMultiple Choice
PK0-005 Practice Question: A project is experiencing scope creep because…
A project is experiencing scope creep because stakeholders are requesting additional features without formal change control. What is the best course of action for the project manager to prevent this?
⚠ Common exam trap
Many exam-takers think rejecting all changes (Option B) is a strong control measure, but the exam tests understanding that a formal process—not blanket rejection—is the correct way to manage scope while still allowing beneficial changes.
Answer choices
Why each option matters
Answer the question above first, then reveal the full breakdown to understand why each option is right or wrong.
Correct answer & explanation
✓
Implement a formal change control process and require approval for all changes.
Scope creep is best prevented by implementing a formal change control process that requires all changes to be reviewed and approved before integration. This ensures that every additional feature is evaluated for impact on scope, schedule, budget, and quality, aligning with the project management plan and preventing uncontrolled expansion of project deliverables.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✗
Add the features and update the project schedule.
Why it's wrong here
Accepting the features without a change request bypasses the change control board, so scope, schedule and budget baselines drift further. It tempts because it preserves stakeholder goodwill and velocity, and would be correct once the change request is approved and baselines are formally updated.
- ✗
Reject all changes immediately.
Why it's wrong here
Blanket rejection ignores the change control process, which evaluates each request's merit, cost and schedule impact before approval or denial. It tempts as a quick defence of the baseline, yet the correct approach routes requests through the change control board for documented assessment rather than refusing them outright.
- ✓
Implement a formal change control process and require approval for all changes.
Why this is correct
A formal change control process with mandatory approval gates creates the governance mechanism that stops unapproved features entering scope. It satisfies the stem's constraint by routing every stakeholder request through documented impact assessment, so additions are only accepted once the sponsor authorises the corresponding schedule and budget revisions.
- ✗
Escalate to the project sponsor without discussion.
Why it's wrong here
Escalation bypasses the change control board that should evaluate each request against the approved scope baseline, so it removes the governance mechanism rather than restoring it. It tempts because sponsors can authorise changes, but only after impact analysis and documented approval, not as a substitute for the process.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
One of 954 original PK0-005 practice questions on Courseiva, each with a full explanation and wrong-answer analysis — not exam dumps or protected exam content. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
This PK0-005 practice question is part of Courseiva's free CompTIA certification practice question bank. Courseiva provides original exam-style practice questions with explanations, topic-based practice, mock exams, readiness tracking, and study analytics to help learners prepare for the PK0-005 exam.