PK0-005 Project Management Concepts Practice Question
During project execution, the project team completes a deliverable that exceeds the specified requirements by adding extra features without authorization. This is an example of which concept?
⚠ Common exam trap
PK0-005 often tests the distinction between gold plating and scope creep — the key differentiator is who initiated the unauthorized change (the team vs. the stakeholder), and candidates frequently pick scope creep for any unapproved scope addition.
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
✓
Gold plating
Gold plating is the practice of adding features or functionality beyond the agreed scope without authorization, often with the intent of pleasing the customer. The scenario describes exactly this: the team delivered extra features that were not in the requirements.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✓
Gold plating
Why this is correct
Gold plating occurs when the team adds unrequested features beyond the agreed scope, exactly as described. It satisfies the scenario's constraint of unauthorised extra functionality, consuming budget and time without approval. Unlike scope creep, which is uncontrolled change from stakeholders, gold plating is extra work initiated by the team itself.
- ✗
Scope creep
Why it's wrong here
Scope creep is unauthorised additions to the agreed scope baseline, whereas this describes gold plating: extra features delivered voluntarily without a change request. Scope creep is tempting because both involve unapproved work, and it is correct when stakeholders gradually expand requirements beyond what was baselined.
- ✗
Value analysis
Why it's wrong here
Value analysis examines whether a component's function justifies its cost, typically during design or procurement reviews; it does not describe unauthorised additions to a deliverable. It is tempting because added features appear to increase value, and it would be correct when assessing whether a function's benefit warrants its expense.
- ✗
Progressive elaboration
Why it's wrong here
Progressive elaboration is the iterative refinement of project and product detail as understanding improves, which is planned and sanctioned; it does not cover unapproved additions beyond agreed requirements. It is tempting because both involve changing detail during execution, and it would be correct when requirements are legitimately detailed further through successive iterations.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
This PK0-005 question is part of Courseiva's 954-question bank — original exam-style content with full explanations and wrong-answer analysis, never real exam questions or exam dumps. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →
JA
Written and reviewed by Johnson Ajibi, MSc IT Security
Senior Network & Security Engineer · founder of Courseiva
Last reviewed September 2026 · checked against the official CompTIA exam blueprint
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.