A project manager has been leading a highly complex project and ensured all required tasks were completed. During a recent external audit, the manager was informed that a heavy penalty was imposed on the project for the latest implemented module. What should the project manager have done to prevent liabilities from that implementation?

The correct answer is ensuring all required approvals were received per organizational procedures. This directly addresses potential liabilities by confirming compliance with established protocols, which often include legal, regulatory, or contractual sign-offs. A heavy penalty suggests a breach of such requirements. While resolving defects, completing scope tasks, and completing documentation are crucial for project success and quality, they do not directly prevent penalties stemming from a lack of formal authorization or compliance. Defects (even if resolved) or incomplete scope might lead to rework or dissatisfaction, but not necessarily a "heavy penalty" for an implemented module unless that implementation itself was unauthorized or non-compliant. Post-implementation documentation is important for project closure and lessons learned, but it wouldn't prevent a penalty incurred during or immediately after implementation.