They hardly ever deliver the agreed end-results on time is the most common complaint they have about internal project teams – from my discussions with executives. Although there are a number of reasons why this frequently happens, one of the most common reasons is scope creep. The tendency for project team to carry out more work than originally agreed and/or is needed for making the project a success is how scope creep can be defined. There are two different types of scope creep - external and internal. The reasons for the two types are different, while the steps required to see that it does not happen, or that the consequences are limited. These two types will therefore be described individually.

External scope creep is caused by sponsors or other stakeholders asking the project team to perform more work than was originally agreed. The normal tendency of most project managers and project teams is to blindly say “yes” without thinking about the consequences. Sometimes extra work is welcomed by the team; in fact, it gives the team an excuse for not finishing on time. It lies with the project manager for guarding against external scope creep is their primary responsibility.

The project manager needs to guard against scope creep by ensuring that all requests for additional work are known to him. When he is made aware of a request for additional work he should carefully assess whether the requested work fits within the scope of the project and whether it can be done within the agreed resource and time limitations. If this is not the case, then he and the team should discuss the concern with the sponsor and agree the solution. The solution can be a) not performing the extra activities, b) performing the extra activities but dropping another activity, or c) performing the extra activity and extending the available time or increasing available resources. The project manager have to use the project charter as the basis for discussions on this topic. While this will not “magically” see that the project is completed on time, it will, at the very least, enable a structured discussion on priorities.

Internal scope creep is when the project team decides to do more work than agreed and/or is required for meeting the project goals. A clear case of such a situation is a project I am currently helping. In this project the team consists of people from different technical departments within a large network company. Developing a telecoms vision for the next ten years is the responsibility that was given to the team. The team has been given considerable freedom in defining its particular deliverables and project approach, but has also been given a very tight deadline. The naturally tendency of such a team is for everybody to raise the concerns that are vital for their department, and make suggestions for activities that they personally find interesting. Because the team is democratic in its approach, resulting in a very broad list of activities to be carried out, it is very difficult to prioritize or censor.

My help so far to this team has focused on helping them to realize the exact need driving the request from their management team. Using this, we have been able to focus the goals of the project on helping to resolve the core concerns that the management is facing. We have then thoroughly developed a work plan focusing only on understanding the key drivers for the requirements to be placed on the company’s telecom services in the next ten years, using this as a starting point. In parallel, we are defining a work stream that will help us understand how the telecom service provider environment will develop. Combining these two activities will allow the team to give the management team the vision it needed for making key asset-related decisions.

As the real danger will lie in the day-to-day activities being carried out by the team, this step has only given a starting point for controlling scope creep. We have therefore agreed that in the ongoing review of the activities being carried out by the team members and sub-teams we will use a “scope test”. Fundamentally, this “scope test” consists of a diagram showing the inner-most circle of telecoms related assets, services, requirements, etc, and an outer ring which has all the direct influencers of the internal ring. It will be placed in the diagram, if there is uncertainty about an activity being carried out It will be seen as being out-of-scope and discontinued if it is not placed in the two inner-most circles.

On the depth of the analysis being carried out, in addition to this “yes/no” decision regarding activities, we have also agreed to have an ongoing dialog. The team chiefly consists of engineers, whose common work requires 100% accuracy. Given the time frames of this project, this will be inconceivable. In addition, this level of detail and truth is not required for developing the high-level vision required by management. To prioritize their activities and agree when to stop a given activity we have therefore agreed to have an ongoing dialog with the team members. This will be one of my key activities going forward given my experience in putting together presentations for executive boards.

In conclusion:  for teams carrying out complex projects scope creep is a very common concern. Nevertheless, the effects can be controlled and minimized by using some quite simple approaches and tools.

Wishing you the best in your projects
Project Management Club – Lead Don’t Follow
<a href=”www.projectmanagementclub.com”>www.ProjectManagementClub.com</a>

Follow Us On Facebook