CAPM Practice: Validate requirements through product delivery

Incremental validation embodies the agile principle of early feedback. Discovering a requirements misalignment in Sprint 3 requires fixing one feature; discovering it in final UAT after a year of development requires extensive rework. Early, frequent validation dramatically reduces the cost of requirements errors.

**Why not B:** End-of-project validation is not always preferable. Discovering requirements misalignments after a year of development makes rework extremely expensive. Incremental validation catches issues early when corrections are cheap, significantly reducing the cost of requirements errors.

**Why not C:** Validating only a random sample of requirements at each stage is incomplete and risky. Incremental validation aims to validate all requirements as their corresponding functionality is delivered, not just a random subset. Every increment should be validated against its relevant requirements.

**Why not D:** Incremental validation is not slower — it is faster at catching and correcting problems. While each validation cycle adds effort during development, the total cost is lower because issues are found early when they are cheap to fix, rather than late when rework is expensive.