Operations keeps a 24/7 water plant running while a one-time SCADA replacement is scheduled beside that work. How should ownership be separated?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
Keep the plant humming under operations, and let the project team deliver the SCADA swap as a temporary endeavor. Two lanes, one facility—don’t mash them into one ownership blob.
Full Explanation
Operations and projects can run in parallel: operations keep the 24/7 water plant running while a one-time SCADA replacement is temporary unique project work that delivers the new system. Correct separation treats SCADA replacement as project delivery beside ongoing plant operations. Letting operations own both the plant and the entire SCADA replacement end to end fails by concept when the replacement is a temporary endeavor needing project governance, charter, and closure—operations ownership of BAU does not erase the need for project management of the change. Canceling the project because ongoing plant ops make temporary endeavors impossible fails because coexistence of operations and projects is normal in continuous civic facilities. Moving plant operations into the SCADA project charter until cutover finishes fails because the plant’s ongoing service is not a temporary project deliverable to charter; doing so confuses BAU accountability. Exam caveat: CAPM fundamentals emphasize that projects deliver change while operations sustain current services—especially visible in utilities that cannot shut down. Operational check: keep operations responsible for safe plant running, charter the SCADA replacement as a project with cutover and handover criteria, and define joint blackout/cutover windows so neither side assumes the other owns both roles.