PMP Change Control Process Practice Question
Your IT infrastructure project is being audited for compliance. The auditor finds that several change requests were approved verbally but not documented. The project is in the execution phase. Which TWO actions should you take?
⚠ Common exam trap
PMP often tests the misconception that undocumented changes should be reversed or that work should stop; the correct PMI mindset is to document retroactively and fix the process, not to undo or halt work.
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
✓
Update the change control process to require written approval before implementation
Option A is correct because the root cause is a process gap: the change control process must be strengthened so that written approval (e.g., a signed change request or CCB record) is mandatory before any change is implemented, preventing recurrence during the execution phase. Option C is correct because the undocumented verbal approvals must be captured in the change log and formally signed off retroactively to restore the audit trail and configuration management integrity for changes already made. Option B is not appropriate because reverting to the original baseline is not required by the audit finding and could disrupt valid, approved work. Option D is unnecessary since the issue is documentation, not the technical quality of the work. Option E is excessive; halting all project work would be a disproportionate response when the corrective actions are process and documentation updates.
Answer analysis
Option-by-option breakdown
For each option: why learners choose it and why it is or isn't the right answer here.
- ✓
Update the change control process to require written approval before implementation
Why this is correct
This action directly addresses the root cause of the audit finding by strengthening the project's change control system. By mandating written approval *before* implementation, the project ensures that all future changes are properly authorized and documented, aligning with compliance requirements and preventing similar issues from arising in subsequent audits. This is a crucial preventative action for long-term project governance and audit readiness.
- ✗
Reverse the undocumented changes and revert to the original baseline
Why it's wrong here
Reverting to the original baseline is an unnecessary and wasteful action. The core issue identified by the audit is a lack of proper documentation for approved changes, not that the changes themselves were unauthorized or incorrect. Undoing approved work would incur significant rework costs and schedule delays without resolving the underlying process deficiency in change management.
- ✓
Retroactively document all verbal change requests and obtain signatures
Why this is correct
This is a critical remedial action to address the immediate non-compliance identified by the audit. Retroactively documenting all verbally approved changes and securing formal signatures creates the necessary audit trail, demonstrating due diligence and accountability for past modifications. This step ensures that the project can provide evidence of authorized changes, satisfying current audit requirements and validating project expenditures.
- ✗
Request the team to redo the work to ensure it meets requirements
Why it's wrong here
Requesting the team to redo the work is inappropriate as the audit did not indicate that the completed work fails to meet requirements or quality standards. The problem lies with the *documentation* of the change approval process, not the technical execution or validity of the work itself. Redoing work would be a significant waste of project resources, time, and budget, without addressing the actual compliance gap.
- ✗
Stop all project work until the audit is resolved
Why it's wrong here
Halting all project work is an extreme and disproportionate response to a documentation compliance issue. While the audit is serious, it primarily concerns process adherence and record-keeping, not an immediate threat to project viability or safety. Stopping work would lead to significant schedule delays, increased costs, and potential loss of momentum, without directly contributing to the resolution of the documentation problem.
Go deeper
Related to this question
About these practice questions
Courseiva writes every PMP question from scratch — 820 in total, each with an explanation and a wrong-answer breakdown. None are copied from real exams or 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 PMI exam blueprint
This PMP practice question is part of Courseiva's free PMI 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 PMP exam.