You are managing a complex systems integration project following a predictive lifecycle. Three months before a major milestone delivery, your technical lead identifies that integrating two vendor systems will require an interface component that was not in the original design. Without this component, the systems cannot communicate, and the milestone deliverable cannot function. Analysis shows: developing the interface will cost $185K and take 8 weeks; the milestone is on the critical path; contingency reserve has $120K remaining; and both vendors claim the interface requirement was implied in the SOW but not explicitly stated. Your legal team is investigating liability. What should you prioritize as project manager?

Question

Accepted Answer

The correct answer is B. Option B is correct because the interface is critical for milestone delivery, and waiting for legal resolution could delay the entire project. As project manager, your primary obligation is delivering the project objectives—beginning interface development immediately protects the critical path while legal liability is resolved separately. Using contingency reserve (meant for identified risks) is appropriate for the portion available, with a change request for the remainder following proper change control. This separates project execution from commercial/legal disputes. Option A allows legal investigation to stop project progress, which is inappropriate when a critical dependency is at risk—legal and delivery can proceed in parallel. Option C attempts to avoid change control by calling it 'clarification' when it's clearly additional scope requiring budget allocation, and negotiating vendor cost-sharing is secondary to protecting delivery. Option D mischaracterizes the situation as a defect (implying error to correct) rather than missing scope, and management reserve is typically for unforeseen risks, not definitive scope additions requiring stakeholder approval through change control.

More Process Questions