Caging the Creep

The "creep" of expanding project scope torments technology teams. Despite detailed specifications and schedules, product requirements often morph once development commences. Stakeholders tack on features, decision-makers can't finalize workflows, and market needs shift. The result? Scope swell far beyond original timelines and resourcing.

This scope creep crushes budgets, delays deployments, and exhausts staff. Every alteration fans ripples of change across architecture, user experience, quality assurance testing and downstream systems. As requirements bloat, engineers scramble to reconcile new functionality with existing progress. Technical debt piles up as quick-fix shortcuts are made to meet unrealistic deadlines that no longer align with actual product complexity.

The problem is abetted by project governance breakdowns. Stakeholders request changes without weighing technical impacts or tradeoffs. Leadership grants add-ons to appease vocal customers or markets. Engineers passively accept shifts, fearful of being viewed obstructionist or inflexible.

But resolute change control processes can halt creep. First, organizations must empower project managers and architects to firmly challenge unplanned modifications based on resourcing, schedule, and sustainability impacts. Second, a sharp delineation must exist between application enhancements and defect resolutions. Code fixes to meet the original spec cannot spiral into gratuitous feature additions that invalidate scope.

Above all, a specification should not be open-ended or aspirational. It must outline exact functionality required for an acceptable minimum viable product. Leadership must defend this boundary unrelentingly, denying every unplanned alteration barring extraordinary circumstances. With mature change control policies applied ruthlessly, scope creep finally finds its cage.