A project manager is overseeing a project to develop a new enterprise resource planning (ERP) system. The project is in its final testing phase, and several critical defects have been identified that prevent the system from going live. The project sponsor is pressuring the team to release the system quickly, but the quality assurance (QA) lead insists on addressing all critical defects before deployment. What is the BEST course of action for the project manager?
- AEscalate the disagreement between the sponsor and QA lead to senior management for a decision.
- BOverrule the QA lead and proceed with the planned go-live date to satisfy the sponsor.
- CRelease the system with known critical defects and plan to fix them in a post-implementation phase.
- DPrioritize the critical defects and work with the team to fix them, then negotiate a revised go-live date with the sponsor.
Show answer & explanationAnswer & explanation
Correct answer: D. Prioritize the critical defects and work with the team to fix them, then negotiate a revised go-live date with the sponsor.
Releasing a system with critical defects can lead to significant operational disruptions, user dissatisfaction, and reputational damage, potentially negating the project's benefits. The project manager's responsibility is to ensure the delivered product meets quality standards. Prioritizing and fixing critical defects, then renegotiating the schedule, balances the need for quality with stakeholder expectations.
Why the other options are wrong
- A. Escalating is an option, but the project manager should first attempt to resolve the conflict and present a viable solution based on project quality standards and risk assessment.
- B. Overruling the QA lead on critical defects compromises quality and puts the project and organization at significant risk, which is against project management best practices.
- C. Releasing a system with critical defects is highly risky and generally unacceptable, as it can lead to severe business impact and erode trust.
Quality vs. Schedule Prioritization
Balancing the need to deliver a product that meets quality standards against time constraints and stakeholder pressure for early completion.
- Critical defects must generally be resolved before deployment to avoid significant negative impact.
- Compromising quality for speed often leads to higher costs and re-work later.
- Requires effective negotiation and communication with stakeholders regarding trade-offs.
Memory trick: Critical flaws first, then reschedule, ensuring value is truly measured.