CAPM Practice: Explain when it is appropriate to use a predictive, plan-based approach

Adding unrequested features, even with good intentions, is scope creep — unauthorized addition of work not in the approved scope baseline. In predictive projects, all work must trace to the WBS. Working ahead does not authorize adding new scope. The team member should have reported the extra capacity to the project manager so it could be directed to planned work or documented as a potential future request.

**Why not A:** While adding unplanned features does introduce risk, the PRIMARY principle violated is scope management. Risk is a secondary concern; the fundamental issue is that unauthorized work was added beyond the approved scope baseline without going through change control.

**Why not B:** Working ahead of plan is not inherently a schedule management violation. The issue is not that the team member completed work early, but that they used the extra time to add unauthorized scope. Finishing early and reporting extra capacity would have been appropriate.

**Why not C:** While the unrequested feature may not meet quality standards, the primary violation is scope management, not quality management. Quality concerns are secondary to the fundamental governance issue of adding work outside the approved scope baseline.