Is scope drift always a bad thing in project management?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ivan Seeking
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Drift Scope
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the phenomenon of scope drift in project management, particularly in a long-term project for a large company. Initially focused on a primary objective and low cost, the project evolved as new ideas emerged, ultimately overshadowing the original goals. This shift led to a significant increase in project costs, yet resulted in unexpected success. The conversation highlights the complexities of managing scope and the potential benefits of embracing change during project execution.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of project management principles
  • Familiarity with scope management techniques
  • Knowledge of cost-benefit analysis in project planning
  • Experience with agile methodologies and iterative development
NEXT STEPS
  • Research effective scope management strategies in project management
  • Explore cost-benefit analysis frameworks for project justification
  • Learn about agile project management and its impact on scope drift
  • Investigate case studies of successful projects that experienced scope changes
USEFUL FOR

Project managers, team leaders, and stakeholders involved in long-term projects who are navigating the challenges of scope drift and seeking to understand its implications on project success.

Ivan Seeking
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
Messages
8,252
Reaction score
2,664
For the last two+ years I've been involved in a project for a large company, that began as a back-of-a-napkin idea. I can't describe the project as it is all proprietary [customer] information, but the issue of scope drift is still interesting to consider. I will do my best not to be too cryptic.

We began with two goals: The primary objective X [which can't be discussed directly], and low cost. Early on we were challenged to justify the logic of certain aspects of the project. We justified the work according to the net benefit Y, which basically came down to an operational cost reduction argument unique to our design concept. I wrote an argument for this that passed muster.

As the project progressed, we hit on a number of ideas that gained popularity in their own right. Eventually these ideas became more important than the primary objective X, which had been mofidied to such an extent that it no longer resembled the original goal. Also, as the scope of the project continued to change, the cost of the project increased dramatically. In the end, the project cost much more than originally intended, the original goal X no longer applied, my argument no long applied, and the project is a huge success for reasons never intended.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
If you want to hear God laugh, just tell her your plans for the future.
 

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K