Question 227 of 509

Quick Answer

The answer is frequent changes to project scope without formal approval and lack of clear communication channels. These are two critical project failure risk indicators because, under ISACA’s project governance framework, uncontrolled scope creep erodes baseline controls and budget predictability, while undefined communication paths prevent effective status escalation and task coordination, directly increasing misalignment and failure probability. On the CISA exam, this concept tests your understanding of governance-level risk monitoring rather than technical project management; a common trap is confusing “frequent changes” with agile adaptability, but remember that ISACA emphasizes formal approval as a gate for any scope deviation. To recall these two indicators, use the mnemonic “Scope and Speak” — scope creep without approval and poor speaking (communication) channels signal imminent failure.

CISA Practice Question: Information Systems Acquisition, Development and Implementation

This CISA practice question tests your understanding of information systems acquisition, development and implementation. The scenario asks you to isolate a root cause — eliminate options that address a different problem before choosing. After answering, compare your reasoning against the explanation and wrong-answer breakdown below. Once you have made your selection, read the full explanation to reinforce the concept and understand why each distractor is designed to mislead on exam day.

Which TWO of the following are indicators that a project is at risk of failure according to ISACA's project governance framework?

Question 1hardmulti select
Full question →

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

Lack of clear communication channels among team members.

Option B is correct because ISACA's project governance framework identifies lack of clear communication channels as a key risk indicator. Without defined communication paths, team members cannot effectively share status updates, escalate issues, or coordinate tasks, leading to misalignment and increased failure probability.

Key principle: Answer the scenario, not the keyword: identify the specific constraint before choosing the most familiar-sounding option.

Answer analysis

Option-by-option breakdown

For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.

  • Regular status meetings with stakeholders.

    Why it's wrong here

    Regular meetings are a positive practice.

  • Lack of clear communication channels among team members.

    Why this is correct

    Poor communication causes misunderstandings and delays.

    Related concept

    Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer.

  • Adoption of iterative development.

    Why it's wrong here

    Iterative development is a methodology, not a risk indicator.

  • Frequent changes to project scope without formal approval.

    Why this is correct

    Uncontrolled scope changes lead to cost and schedule overruns.

    Related concept

    Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer.

  • Use of a project management office (PMO).

    Why it's wrong here

    PMO provides oversight and is beneficial.

Common exam traps

Common exam trap: answer the scenario, not the keyword

The trap here is that candidates may confuse a lack of communication channels with other common risk factors like scope creep, but ISACA specifically lists communication breakdowns as a distinct risk indicator separate from scope change management.

Detailed technical explanation

How to think about this question

ISACA's project governance framework emphasizes that communication channels must be formally defined in the project communication plan, including escalation paths and frequency of updates. In practice, a lack of clear channels often manifests as missed milestone notifications, unresolved technical dependencies, or stakeholders receiving conflicting information, which can cascade into scope creep or budget overruns. The framework aligns with PMBOK's communication management knowledge area, where a communication matrix specifies who receives what information and when.

KKey Concepts to Remember

  • Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer.
  • Find the constraint that changes the correct option.
  • Eliminate answers that are true in general but not in this case.

TExam Day Tips

  • Watch for words such as best, first, most likely and least administrative effort.
  • Review why wrong options are wrong, not only why the correct option is correct.

Key takeaway

Answer the scenario, not the keyword: identify the specific constraint before choosing the most familiar-sounding option.

Real-world example

How this comes up in practice

A small business has 20 workstations on the 192.168.1.0/24 network and one public IP from its ISP. The router uses PAT (NAT overload) so all 20 devices share one public address using different source ports. NAT questions test whether you understand the four address terms and which direction each translation applies.

What to study next

Got this wrong? Here's your next step.

Identify which exam domain this question belongs to, review the core concept, then practise similar questions from the same domain.

Related practice questions

Related CISA practice-question pages

Use these pages to review the topic behind this question. This is how one missed question becomes focused revision.

Practice this exam

Start a free CISA practice session

Short sessions build daily habit. Longer sessions build exam-day stamina. Try a timed session to simulate real conditions.

FAQ

Questions learners often ask

What does this CISA question test?

Information Systems Acquisition, Development and Implementation — This question tests Information Systems Acquisition, Development and Implementation — Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer..

What is the correct answer to this question?

The correct answer is: Lack of clear communication channels among team members. — Option B is correct because ISACA's project governance framework identifies lack of clear communication channels as a key risk indicator. Without defined communication paths, team members cannot effectively share status updates, escalate issues, or coordinate tasks, leading to misalignment and increased failure probability.

What should I do if I get this CISA question wrong?

Identify which exam domain this question belongs to, review the core concept, then practise similar questions from the same domain.

What is the key concept behind this question?

Read the scenario before looking for a memorised answer.

About these practice questions

Courseiva creates original exam-style practice questions with explanations and wrong-answer analysis. It does not publish real exam questions, exam dumps, or protected exam content. Learn why practice questions differ from exam dumps →

How Courseiva writes practice questions · Editorial policy

Last reviewed: Jun 25, 2026

Question Discussion

Share a tip, memory trick, or ask about the reasoning behind this question. Do not post real exam questions, leaked content, braindumps, or copyrighted exam material. Comments are moderated and may be removed without notice.

Loading comments…

Sign in to join the discussion.

This CISA practice question is part of Courseiva's free ISACA 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 CISA exam.