How to Prevent/Minimize Scope Creep

Interview with Kate P., Director, Training & Organizational Effectiveness– Apria Healthcare
 

How would you define what scope creep is and why it occurs? Is scope creep always considered a negative impact?

Scope creep is when the parameters of what you originally agreed upon are unexpectedly expanded. Scope creep is not always a bad thing; it depends on how extensive, pervasive, and realistic the changes are.

Scope creep occurs when the client group is not properly contracted with up front. It is so important up front when talking about a project that you are fully outlining what the options are, the client understands what the options are, and the options are agreed upon by both parties.

Scope creep occurs because things are added to the original parameters. Sometimes the introduction of additional requirements can have a positive outcome on the overall project – again, it just depends how extensive, pervasive, and realistic the changes are.

Can scope creep be prevented or only minimized? Does scope creep generally impact the project by increasing the amount of work?

I do not think you can ever eliminate scope creep but you can minimize it. Scope creep usually does increase the amount of work. You define the resources and time it takes to accomplish the project; if a client asks for changes, it is going to require more energy to accomplish the project.

What are some strategies to prevent scope creep?

Some strategies to prevent scope creep include involving all stakeholders and resources in the beginning before negotiations, having open communication throughout the project, and identifying the process for scope changes (e.g., who has authority to sign off on the changes).

The contract piece up front with all of the key stakeholders to establish the priorities and deliverable deadlines is an important strategy. Ongoing communication helps prevent scope creep.  For example, when you do or do not hit a milestone, the project manager should communicate with all involved parties to ensure the priorities and deliverable dates are still viable.

Can scope creep be minimized? How so?

Scope creep can be minimized by defining the expectations required up front, exploring all possibilities up front and prioritizing appropriately.

I also think it is important to be able to influence the client group so that the decision to hold to the agreed-upon scope is their idea and not the project manager or the resources. Most people are rational and understand the balance of time, money and people, but that ability influence is so important.

What role does a Project Manager play in scope creep? What are some project management challenges?

The role a Project Manager plays in scope creep depends on the project.

If it is a small project and the Project Manager is also the resource for delivering the project, the PM has a lot more to leverage as they are ultimately the person who will fulfill the project.

If the Project Manager is handling multiple resources, the role is more facilitation than negotiation. Normally Project Managers do not have as much to leverage; they can only identify what the risks are and communicate those.

The challenge Project Managers face is getting the right people together to have the conversation and make a decision.

How should scope changes be managed? Should approvals of scope changes be done in writing?

How scope changes should be managed depends on the project. If it is a complex, large scale project with multiple stakeholders and  millions of dollars involved, that definitely requires scope changes to be written up every time there are changes and keeping logs of the changes. It is important to record the history of the project as resources may roll off; new stakeholders and/or resources may need to review the change, who authorized those, and why. If it is a small project, you do not have to have all that bureaucracy.

Should key players understand that change is inevitable before working on a project? Are there key topics or ideas that should be explored before beginning a project?

I absolutely think key players should understand change is inevitable. I am fascinated by human response to change. That is what I call change management: focusing on the human side of change. It is a process to help the organization to embrace change.  People naturally resist change, and change is inevitable. In a project you know things are going to change; if you know this upfront and understand it, you can avoid a whole lot of heartache down the road. All key players need to acknowledge this and determine how to handle those changes when they arrive.

I think it is important to explore all project possibilities and options up front.  A common example is with system implementations.  The key stakeholders should define their business requirements AND fully understand the available functionality of the software to prioritize “must-haves” and “nice-to-haves” before going into negotiations. Other topics to identify up front are the rules of engagement: how often to have meetings, at what point to engage resources when there are changes, who needs to sign off on changes, etc.

What are some areas that cause scope creep (budget, requirements, duration of project, etc)? What is the best way to handle changing requirements?

All of those things; budget requirements, project duration, requirements, causes scope creep to occur. Scope creep does not have to be a bad thing. In the context that we most commonly use it, it is generally bad.

 If you have additional budget or duration for the project, and if the ultimate goal is to have a successful outcome, then scope creep is not necessarily a bad thing. For example, if you realize midstream you need to add additional topics to a training course that will improve the learning outcome, then that is not necessarily a bad thing. Usually we have a deadline or certain resource or budget constraints that make scope creep so challenging.

Handling changing requirements really depends on each situation and the size and complexity of the project. The most important thing is communication and refocusing on the goal/what needs to be accomplished and understanding how it impacts all priorities on the list. You essentially re-contract every time changing requirements occur.

What is the definition of a successful project? Can scope creep prevent a project from being completed or cause it to be over budget or late?

A successful project is one that achieves the desired outcome with “minimal noise.”  I define “minimal noise” as the effective use of resources (time, people, and money). Scope creep can cause a project to be late, over budget or not completed at all. I have seen scope creep kill many initiatives before they could be implemented. Sometimes projects start off small but because they were not properly scoped up front they become complex, overworked, and not well-received by the organization. The project can die before implementation or after go-live; this is the dangerous side of scope creep.

From your past experiences, what role did scope creep play and how did you work through it to complete a successful project?

Scope creep usually refers to clients wanting more, causing the project to expand in scope. However, in my line of work (learning and organization development) I often see the opposite: the client wants less.

Let me give you an example.  Let’s say we start contracting with a client group to provide a multiple day workshop to learn a complex skill. This is not uncommon because it takes time and practice to learn a new skill. Originally the client agrees to our proposal…then begins to realize they cannot afford to have the learners away from work for multiple days. Negotiations ensue: the multi-day workshop gets pared down to one day, the one-day workshop becomes a half-day, and eventually the client asks if we can just  insert a microchip into everyone’s head rather than pulling them into a classroom. Yes, there are scope changes, but that does not necessarily increase the size of the project.

My role in an example like this is to educate the client group on the benefits of the learning intervention. I help them understand adult learning theory and the necessity of skill practice versus lecture so they can make a better-informed decision.  I have process that I go through; it does not always work but it certainly helps. There is usually some middle ground between what I recommend and what the client will commit to. It always starts and ends with educating the client group.

There is always a level of trust and credibility. The client group has to trust that I am an expert; my job is to educate them on what the best practices are so we can agree on the project scope that will lead to a successful outcome.

« go back to all articles