The term scope creep describes a gradual expansion of an effort's scope, often outside the awareness of the people involved. They do recognize that the effort has become more ambitious, but they usually express surprise and shock when they finally appreciate the size of the resource shortfall. Curiously, the word creep doesn't connote growth or expansion — it carries instead a sense of gradual change with no direction implied.
That raises several questions. When scope creeps, why does it expand much more often than it contracts? Why don't we ever wake up one morning shocked to find enormous budget surpluses resulting from the gradual ebbing of scope that took place outside our awareness? Why do we never finish projects under budget and early because of out-of-control scope ebbing?
Downscoping does happen, usually when we trim goals to get out of trouble. But downscoping is consciously planned. Scope creep is neither conscious nor planned. The real question is: Why do so many unplanned changes of scope lead to scope expansion instead of scope contraction?
Two classes of mechanisms might explain the dominance of expansion over contraction. First, when we make scope change decisions, we might systematically fail to investigate — or even consider — suggestions that contract scope. Second, when we make such decisions, we might systematically favor alternatives that expand scope.
Because cognitive biases often provide intriguing explanations of behavioral phenomena that seem unrelated to intent, here is Part I of a short catalog of relevant cognitive biases, emphasizing systematic biases inhibiting adoption or consideration of scope contraction strategies.
- Sunk Cost Effect
- To investors, the term sunk cost denotes costs already incurred and not recoverable. The sunk cost effect [Staw 1976] is a bias that tends to make us unwilling to terminate an effort, because of the difficulty of accepting failure, even when continuing the effort will only lead to greater losses.
- Irrational Escalation
- Irrational escalationWhy don't we ever wake up in the
morning shocked to find enormous
budget surpluses resulting from
the gradual ebbing of scope
that took place outside
our awareness? bias can cause us to commit increasing levels of resources even when evidence strongly indicates that doing so is foolish. Unlike the Sunk Cost Effect, this bias can take hold even before resources have actually been expended. Mere commitment of resources is all that's required. For example, in bidding wars, the bidders eventually increase their bids well beyond the value of the items sought.
- Endowment Effect
- This bias affects how we value what we possess relative to what we don't. We tend to ascribe greater value to what we have now than we would be willing to pay to acquire it. In the business context, this bias might account for overvaluing work already performed, which could enhance both the sunk cost effect and irrational escalation. We might also overvalue the opportunity to continue work already underway, relative to any work we might do instead.
These three biases can contribute to failure to consider scope reduction alternatives. Next time, we'll examine biases that might make us more receptive to scope expansion. First in this series Next in this series 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
Your comments are welcomeWould you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenogMhuqCxAnbfLvzbner@ChacigAthhhYwzZDgxshoCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.
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.
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.
More articles on Project Management:
- Some Causes of Scope Creep
- When we suddenly realize that our project's scope has expanded far beyond its initial boundaries —
when we have that how-did-we-ever-get-here feeling — we're experiencing the downside of scope
creep. Preventing scope creep starts with understanding how it happens.
- Backtracking in Incremental Problem Solving
- Incremental problem solving is fashionable these days. Whether called evolutionary, incremental, or
iterative, the approach entails unique risks. Managing those risks sometimes requires counterintuitive action.
- Down in the Weeds: II
- To be "down in the weeds," in one of its senses, is to be lost in discussion at a level of
detail inappropriate to the current situation. Here's Part II of our exploration of methods for dealing
with this frustrating pattern so common in group discussions.
- Joint Leadership Teams: OODA
- Some teams, business units, or enterprises are led not by individuals, but by joint leadership teams
of two or more. They face special risks that arise from the organizations that host them, from the team
they lead, or from within the joint leadership team itself.
- Ten-Minute Training
- Despite decades of evolution of technology-assisted workplace learning, instructor-led classroom formats
remain the most popular and effective. Now perhaps videoconferencing can help to achieve that effectiveness
at lower cost.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming December 6: Off-Putting and Conversational Narcissism at Work: III
- Having off-putting interactions is one of four themes of conversational narcissism. Here are seven behavioral patterns that relate to off-putting interactions and how abusers use them to control conversations. Available here and by RSS on December 6.
- And on December 13: Contrary Indicators of Psychological Safety: I
- To take the risks that learning and practicing new ways requires, we all need a sense that trial-and-error approaches are safe. Organizations seeking to improve processes would do well to begin by assessing their level of psychological safety. Available here and by RSS on December 13.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenogMhuqCxAnbfLvzbner@ChacigAthhhYwzZDgxshoCanyon.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