[53] in magellan
A Trick to limit "Scope Creep"
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Bill Cattey)
Wed Feb 10 18:19:52 1999
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 1999 17:42:29 +0000 ()
From: Bill Cattey <wdc@MIT.EDU>
To: delivery@MIT.EDU, itit@MIT.EDU, magellan@MIT.EDU, saurons@MIT.EDU
I was reading the December 1998 PM Network Magazine, and came across a
gem that I thought was a really sensible way to approach answering the
question, "Should this newly discovered aspect become part of the
project?"
Some people feel that if a scope change is justified, it should be
accepted. However, almost all scope changes are justified; very few
project managers or steering committees will accept scope changes
that have no benefits.
...
The real evaluation of a scope change request is whether or not it
contributes to the original benefits of the project. That is, does
it increase those benefits or increase the probability that they
will be realized. If not, it must be rejected, no matter how
beneficial it may be. If it has its own valid benefits, it can
become a separate project, but it cannot serve as a scope change.
Keep this gem in mind the next time someone wants to change a project in
mid-stream. Be prepared to say, "That needs to be in a follow-on
project. We should focus on finishing this project first."
-wdc
