In a fixed-time, fixed-budget project the customer requires the core component to be developed using agile because the final scope isn't defined. While drafting the contract, which two controls should the project manager include to prevent development costs from harming profitability? (Choose two.)

Tiering the contract for fixed and agile components allows the project manager to clearly define the scope and associated costs for the fixed-price elements, while using an agile approach (e.g., time and materials, or capped time and materials) for the undefined core component. This mitigates risk by separating the predictable from the unpredictable. Limiting the number of iterations for development in the contract provides a clear boundary for the agile portion, preventing open-ended development that could erode profitability. This sets expectations and controls costs within the fixed-time, fixed-budget constraints. Creating a governance committee is a good practice but doesn't directly control costs in the contract. Predefined alternatives to scope changes are useful for fixed-price contracts but less applicable to an undefined agile component. Requiring only internal resources doesn't inherently control costs or address the hybrid nature of the project.