Ground Level Sources of Scope Creep

On April 11, 1951, in the midst of the Korean War, U.S. President Harry Truman relieved Gen. Douglas MacArthur, replacing him as "Supreme Commander, Allied Powers; Commander-in-Chief, United Nations Command; Commander-in-Chief, Far East; and Commanding General, U.S. Army, Far East." This historic act followed months of conflict between the General and the President, in which MacArthur repeatedly and publicly criticized Truman's policies. Worse, he had repeatedly and publicly offered his own analyses and alternative policies for comparison with Truman's. Some of his statements might even have influenced the North Koreans and the Chinese in formulating their own policies and strategies.

In effect, Gen. MacArthur's actions led to the wartime analog of the scope creep that is so familiar to project managers. But unlike many scope creep incidents, this scope creep originated not at the top, but somewhere below — at "ground level."

And something similar can happen in projects, when scope creep results from the behavior of team members who aren't high-level decision makers. Here are three examples.

Technology aficionados

Technology aficionados usually have technical roles and purely technical interests. They're more interested in the technical issues than they are in balancing the technical and the business agendas. When they encounter or generate an idea that is outside the scope of the effort, they urge it forward if they feel it's "the right thing." They act publicly, using meetings, email, or other communication channels to make their ideas part of the overall task. When they act without first consulting those responsible for managing organizational resources, they create "fires" that managers must extinguish.

Tactically oriented sales representatives

Tactically Some people act publicly, using
meetings, email, or other
communication channels
to make their ideas part
of the overall taskoriented sales reps focus on immediate sales opportunities to the detriment of a more strategic perspective. In some cases, they promise customers features or capabilities that the organization must then deliver, even if they weren't originally in scope.

Embedded consultants

Technology consultants are sometimes embedded in the organization on a short-term basis. They often have technology-specific knowledge and perspective, and some bear certifications in proprietary technologies. Sometimes, they acquire a bias in favor of their own areas of expertise. They lose objectivity. When that happens, their advice can conflict with the larger goals of the organization. That is, even though we invite technology gurus into our organizations for specific purposes, they can exert influence on the people they work with relative to their specializations, and beyond their charters. However innocent their motives might be, their advice can nevertheless lead to scope creep.

Were it not for the effects of organizational politics, a combination of training, orientation, and performance management could prevent or contain the effects of these mechanisms. But in organizations, as in war, once the unwelcome ideas float upward from ground level, politics can limit the ability of the organization to contain them.  Top    Next Issue

Is every other day a tense, anxious, angry misery as you watch people around you, who couldn't even think their way through a game of Jacks, win at workplace politics and steal the credit and glory for just about everyone's best work including yours? Read 303 Secrets of Workplace Politics, filled with tips and techniques for succeeding in workplace politics. More info

For more about scope creep, see "The Perils of Political Praise," Point Lookout for May 19, 2010; "More Indicators of Scopemonging," Point Lookout for August 29, 2007; "Scopemonging: When Scope Creep Is Intentional," Point Lookout for August 22, 2007; "Some Causes of Scope Creep," Point Lookout for September 4, 2002; "The Deck Chairs of the Titanic: Strategy," Point Lookout for June 29, 2011; and "The Deck Chairs of the Titanic: Task Duration," Point Lookout for June 22, 2011.

Your comments are welcome

About Point Lookout

Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.

This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.

Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.

Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.

Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.

Related articles

More articles on Workplace Politics:

Projection Errors at Work

Often, at work, we make interpretations of the behavior of others. Sometimes we base these interpretations not on actual facts, but on our perceptions of facts. And our perceptions are sometimes erroneous.

What You See Isn't Always What You Get

We all engage in interpreting the behavior of others, usually without thinking much about it. Whenever you notice yourself having a strong reaction to someone's behavior, consider the possibility that your interpretation has outrun what you actually know.

The Power of Situational Momentum

For many of us, the typical workday presents a series of opportunities to take action. We often approach these situations by choosing among the expected choices. But usually there are choices that exploit situational momentum, and they can be powerful choices indeed.

Failure Foreordained

Performance Improvement Plans help supervisors guide their subordinates toward improved performance. But they can also be used to develop documentation to support termination. How can subordinates tell whether a PIP is a real opportunity to improve?

Human Limitations and Meeting Agendas

Recent research has discovered a class of human limitations that constrain our ability to exert self-control and to make wise decisions. Accounting for these effects when we construct agendas can make meetings more productive and save us from ourselves.

See also Workplace Politics and Workplace Politics for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming May 14: Working with the Overconfident

A cognitive bias known as the Overconfidence Effect causes us to overestimate the reliability of our judgments. Decisions we make based on those judgments are therefore suspect. But there are steps we can take to make our confidence levels more realistic, and thus make our decisions more reliable. Available here and by RSS on May 14.

And on May 21: Mismanaging Project Managers

Most organizations hold project managers accountable for project performance. But they don't grant those project managers control of needed resources. Nor do they hold project sponsors or other senior managers accountable for the consequences of their actions when they interfere with project work. Here's a catalog of behaviors worth looking at. Available here and by RSS on May 21.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenDJpmhgyaDTwBQXkhner@ChacmGoYuzfZpOvDQdRkoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.

Get the ebook!

Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:

• Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
• Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
• Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
• Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
• Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
• Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )

Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info