Do we treat Quality Defects as formal Changes? The maturity challenge in PMBOK® 8

Luis Branco CEO| Business Insight, Consultores de Gestão, Ldª Carcavelos, Lisboa, Portugal

Historically, Defect Repair has always been a formal Change Request.

However, with the new systemic structure of the PMBOK® Guide – 8th Edition, I sense that many Project Managers are resolving technical quality issues 'off the books', outside of formal governance, just to protect their 'Delivery' performance metrics.

How does your PMO ensure that technical failures (Quality Inputs) properly feed the formal Change Control process?

If we don't capture these as changes, how can we truly measure the Cost of Non-Conformance (CoNC) or maintain a transparent audit trail for systemic improvements?

I’m interested to hear how you are bridging this gap between agile delivery and rigorous governance.

Posted: Mar 29, 2026 6:06 AM (Updated by author: Mar 29, 2026 6:06 AM)

Lissette Indhira Pimentel Sosa

Community Champion

Program Manager| HARPER SRL Santo Domingo / Distrito Nacional, Dominican Republic

I think not every defect needs full change governance, but anything that impacts scope, cost, timeline, or contractual commitments should be treated as a formal change.

If defects are handled “off the books,” you lose visibility of the real cost and recurring issues. That’s where CoNC gets hidden.

We can set a simple rule: fix small defects within the team flow, but escalate anything with impact into change control. That keeps things practical without losing traceability.

Posted: Mar 30, 2026 8:06 PM

Please login or join to reply

Do we treat Quality Defects as formal Changes? The maturity challenge in PMBOK® 8

Sponsors

Vendor Events

Guessing is not a strategy: How to build decision velocity with AI and real-time data

Newsletters