CAPM Practice: Determine how to document project controls of predictive, plan-based projects

Quality control requires that deliverables meet defined acceptance criteria before they are formally accepted. When a defect is found, the correct response is to document the defect, reject the deliverable, and require defect repair. Accepting a deficient deliverable or changing acceptance criteria to match the deliverable both undermine quality management.

**Why not A:** Accepting a deliverable that does not meet acceptance criteria undermines the entire quality management process. Noting the deficiency but accepting anyway allows substandard work to proceed, potentially causing problems in subsequent phases or in the final product.

**Why not C:** Immediately escalating to the sponsor is premature. The project manager should first document the defect and initiate the standard quality control response — requiring defect repair. Escalation is appropriate only if the defect repair has significant cost, schedule, or scope implications that exceed the project manager's authority.

**Why not D:** Changing the acceptance criteria to match what was delivered is fundamentally backwards. Acceptance criteria define the quality standard the deliverable must meet. Lowering the bar to match a deficient deliverable defeats the purpose of quality control and may compromise the final product.