CAPM Practice: Determine how to conduct stakeholder communication

When verbal commitments aren't followed through, written confirmation (meeting minutes, decision logs, sign-offs) creates accountability. Following up promptly with a written summary of agreements reduces the gap between spoken and written commitments.

**Why not A:** Cutting the stakeholder out of meetings entirely eliminates the opportunity for real-time discussion and collaborative decision-making. The issue is not the meeting format itself but the lack of documented follow-through. Restricting communication to email alone would likely reduce overall engagement and could damage the working relationship.

**Why not B:** Ignoring the emails creates a documentation gap and fails to address the root cause of the conflicting communication. The stakeholder may have legitimate concerns or second thoughts that emerge after the meeting. Simply dismissing written feedback is unprofessional and may lead to unresolved issues surfacing later in the project.

**Why not D:** Recording meetings and reporting the stakeholder to their supervisor is an adversarial approach that damages trust and the working relationship. The pattern may stem from the stakeholder needing more time to process decisions or feeling pressured in group settings, which is better addressed through structured follow-up and explicit confirmation processes.