Around 10 years ago I was living and working internationally
with refugees who were displaced from a neighboring country. I was helping
facilitate language programs for them and also building an internal network for
their transition back into society. We had a small group of 10 managing this
specific project with various stakeholders involved. While the altruistic goal
of service was commendable, the definable objects of the mission were lacking
and scope creep began to sink in fast and often with the team I was working
with. One of the greatest factors that contributed to scope creep in this situation
was a misguided plan. The overarching vision was clear, but definable objects
within a realistic timeline lacked. Looking back I can see how the major factor
that contributed to scope creep was vague plan. Portny et al., (2008) states
that, “the first step toward a successful project is to develop a plan that
allows the project team to do the work required to produce the desired results
in the available time for the available resources” (p.377). One way that our
team should have addressed this issue was through updating the plan as the
project progressed. It’s called scope “creep” because it slowly changes the direction
of the project before anyone can really notice it. This is why a detailed plan
needed to be in place and constant evaluation needs to occur so that addendums
can be made. Greer (2010) makes a similar point calling for the project manager
and others to “update the project scope statement and overall plan. Make an
addendum or a complete revision, if appropriate, of the project schedule, work
breakdown structure, scope description, and so on. Make sure you note all of
the conditions that led to the change, the people who discussed alternatives,
and the people who selected the recommended alternative. Document it—get it in
writing” (p.36).
Another major factor that contributed to scope creep was
the aspect that the team didn’t plan for it to happen. Portny et al., (2008) states
that, “avoiding scope creep is not possible. However, monitoring it,
controlling it, and thereby reducing some of the pain is possible if the
project manager follows a few guidelines” (p.347). The best approach is to set
up a well-controlled, formal process whereby changes can be introduced and
accomplished with as little distress as possible (Portny et al., 2008). The
team didn’t define the outcomes so that when the change and scope creep entered
the project the group was surprised it was there and didn’t know how to handle
it. Every plan that is enforced needs to factor some form of flexibility and
change. Portny et al., (2008) states that, “project managers give themselves
the greatest chance for success if they confront head-on the possibility that
some things might change. They need to prepare at the outset for how to
minimize any associated negative consequences and maximize any positive
consequences” (p.377).
Resources
Greer, M. (2010). The project management minimalist: Just enough PM to rock your
projects! (Laureate custom ed.). Baltimore: Laureate Education, Inc.
Portny, S. E., Mantel, S. J., Meredith, J. R.,
Shafer, S. M., Sutton, M. M., & Kramer, B. E. (2008). Project management: Planning, scheduling, and controlling projects.
Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer).
(n.d.). Monitoring projects [Video file]. Retrieved from
https://class.waldenu.edu
