Core Principles and Frameworks
This domain tests whether you can select a framework for the context and explain why, rather than reciting steps. Principles outrank frameworks: when a framework conflicts with a principle, the principle wins.
Principles that outrank frameworks
- Single accountable owner per outcome, with delegated authority stated.
- Decision points with evidence - stage gates or sprint reviews, not status meetings.
- Proportionality - control effort matched to risk and value.
- Feedback loops - PDCA (Plan-Do-Check-Act) and retrospectives that change behaviour.
- Traceability - requirements to tests to benefits.
Common frameworks and fit
- Stage-gate suits high-consequence, low-uncertainty work where investment is released in tranches.
- Agile/Scrum suits high uncertainty where requirements emerge; it trades predictive scope for frequent validated learning.
- DMAIC (Define-Measure-Analyse-Improve-Control) suits process improvement with measurable defects.
- PDCA is the underlying improvement cycle, not a delivery method.
Worked example
A regulator requires a documented records system in nine months. Uncertainty is low and auditability is high. Reasoning: choose stage-gate with formal baselines, independent quality reviews and a compliance traceability matrix. Agile ceremonies can still run inside stages, but scope cannot be traded freely because the obligation is fixed. If the requirement were exploratory, the answer would flip toward iterative delivery.
Traps
Treating a framework as a checklist produces artefacts without decisions. Applying Agile language to fixed-scope statutory work without explaining the constraints loses marks. Confusing PDCA with a project lifecycle is common. Selecting a framework because it is fashionable, without a fit rationale, is never sufficient.