This is a very interesting question; on the one hand, giving the PM too much say in the project plan can lead to bias and misdirection, and on the other hand, leaving PMs with no say in the process of a project will mean the plan will not reflect any changes that occur. the While I think project managers should have some autonomy to make minor changes to the project plan, major changes that impact stakeholders should always be subject to review and approval in order to ensure transparency and accountability. Ultimately, the success of a project depends on effective communication and collaboration between all parties involved.

Giving Project managers the power to change to a project plan without stakeholders approval is not a good idea. While the Project manager has knowledge of the project and has authority over the project and project team, the business needs for the project may be out of the scope of influence/knowledge that a PM will have. The project has to have a clear purpose for business, it needs to have a need and/or place in the market as well as having the potential to be profitable. Stakeholders take interest in the company and the project so making changes without their consultation can be seen as uncooperative. Project managers main responsibility is to communicate with stakeholders to balance the competing needs of project stakeholders to come with a consensus so that the stakeholders support the project, with that said changes without stakeholder approval will result in loss of their support. 

I believe that project managers do not have the authority to make changes to the project plan without approval from stakeholders. Stakeholders have invested their money into the project so they have the authority and say in any changes that are made to the project plan. I believe any major changes must go through the stakeholders of the project since they have the most to lose and there are many other factors and risks involved. However, I believe that the project manager should be able to make minor changes without review and approval as long as this will have a positive impact on the project. Minor changes should not have a significant impact on the outcome of the project but will help its overall quality. It is still important for the project managers to communicate to the stakeholders of any minor changes so that they are transparent. This ensures that everybody is in the loop and will keep things running smoothly. It's important to communicate all changes to all parties and make sure the project remains on track so that the outcome of the project is the best that it can be.

I think project managers have the right to change the project as long as it doesn't change the entirety of the idea., If the change will cause a change in function or will exclude something major that the stakeholders were expecting, I think the stakeholders should be told and a meeting should held. Yet if the change will still maintain the same functionality and has the major design points, then I think the project manager should be able to make the change without the stakeholders' input. Honestly this is a tricky question but at the same time, the stakeholders should not hold the most say when it comes to a project. At the same time, I believe it is best to be transparent with the stakeholders and show that you are willing to share information with them as to maintain trust within your company since the documentation that will be reviewed will say all changes made anyways and you wouldn't want to surprise those who are investing in the project. 

I believe as a project manager, having the right to change the project if there is no significant change in the basic concept of the project. And as we learned in class, every change should be recorded. Stakeholders can the project at any time. The most important job of a PM is making the project as same as what stakeholders want. Stockholders can ask the PM at the weekly meeting or review if they have any questions. Ideally, if the PM maintains the original purpose of the project, the PM only needs to explain to the stakeholders what they are doing and answer some technical questions in the meeting. If the PM has little power and stockholders like to suggest their opinions. This will be a big problem to test the PM's ability to play it by ear and members will feel stressed.

I think all the changes need to be subject to review and approval from the stakeholders. Stakeholders are the ones providing all the resources to the project. They need to be informed of everything that is happening in the project such as the progression and any delays that might occur. Communication is key, team members need to escalate any issues to the PM, and from there the PM needs to approach the issues to the stakeholders, so everyone is on the same page. The PM could then suggest any changes they want to perform for the sake of the project, and convince the stakeholders to support it so, they can still provide support to the project.

Project managers should have the authority to make changes to the project plan without stakeholder approval, but the extent of the change should be considered, or limited, when making the change without the stakeholder approval. If the change is relatively small and does not have a huge impact on the project — in terms of cost, time, and resources — then the project manager should be able to make the change without stakeholder approval. If the change being made is significant enough to affect the project’s timeline, cost, or affect the output of the project being made, then the project manager should most definitely get the approval of stakeholders before implementing the change. In addition, all changes made to the project are documented and not implemented without approval from certain stakeholders, so it wouldn’t be like the project manager would implement the change without anyone else involved in the project knowing or approving the change.