What is scope creep
Scope creep in software development refers to the gradual expansion of a project’s scope
beyond its original objectives, requirements, or boundaries, often without proper approval or
adjustments to time, budget, or resources. This typically happens when new features,
enhancements, or changes are introduced during the development process without a
structured change management process.What are the costs of scope creep
How does it happen
There are more then 1 way scope creep can happen and mostly scope creep
happens for several reasons;
Unclear Requirements
Vague or incomplete initial requirements lead to additional changes
later.
Lack of Proper Documentation
Without well-defined project documentation, stakeholders
may request modifications that weren’t initially planned.
Stakeholder Influence
Clients, managers, or end-users may push for additional features
after development starts.
Poor Change Control
If there’s no formal process for reviewing and approving changes,
requests can pile up and disrupt timelines.
Gold Plating
Developers or teams add features beyond the agreed scope, believing they
improve the product.
Evolving Market Needs
Rapidly changing technology or user expectations can drive the
need for additional features.
Miscommunication
Lack of clear communication between developers, product owners,
and clients can lead to misunderstandings about project goals.
Consequences of scope creep
1. Delays in project completion
2. Increased costs and budget overruns
3. Higher workload and burnout for the development team
4. Reduced product quality due to rushed work
5. Potential project failure if scope becomes unmanageable
How can we mitigate or minimise scope creep
Define Clear Project Requirements
Set expectations early with detailed specifications.
Use a Change Control Process
Implement a formal review and approval system for
modifications.
Maintain Strong Communication
Keep all stakeholders aligned with regular updates.
Set Priorities with a Product Roadmap
Categorize feature requests based on necessity.
Use Agile Methodology
Agile development allows for flexibility while maintaining control
over feature additions.
Document Everything
Keep track of all agreed-upon changes, deadlines, and expectations.
Case Study’s:
Denver International Airport Baggage System
Background:
Denver International Airport planned to open in 1993 with an advanced automated baggage
handling system to speed up luggage transport and reduce turnaround times for airlines.
How Scope Creep Happened:
1. Initial Plan:
The airport initially intended to implement a simpler baggage system for just one
airline (United Airlines).
2. Expansion of Scope:
During development, airport officials decided to expand the system to cover the
entire airport and multiple airlines. Additional features, like automated barcode
2scanners, intricate conveyor networks, and baggage rerouting, were introduced
without adjusting the timeline or budget.
3. Lack of Proper Change Control:
The additional complexity required software and mechanical changes that weren’t
part of the original project scope. The team tried to accommodate the new features
without a structured review process.
4. Technical Challenges:
The system was now expected to handle thousands of bags per hour across three
concourses, leading to software bugs, mechanical failures, and misrouted
baggage. Developers had to patch issues on the fly, which made the system
unreliable.
5. Delays and Budget Overruns:
The airport delayed its opening by 16 months, and the cost of the baggage system
ballooned from the original $190 million to nearly $560 million. Eventually, the
automated system was abandoned, and airlines reverted to manual baggage handling.
Key Takeaways:
• Uncontrolled feature expansion led to project failure.
• Lack of proper change management made it difficult to adapt.
• Stakeholders kept adding requirements without considering technical feasibility.
• Ignoring developer warnings led to costly mistakes.
This is a classic example of how scope creep can turn a well-intended software project
into a disaster if not managed properly.
Healthcare.gov (U.S. Health Insurance Marketplace)
A more modern example of scope creep in software development is the Healthcare.gov
website launch in 2013.
Background:
Healthcare.gov was developed as the online marketplace for Americans to enroll in health
insurance under the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The goal was to create a user-friendly
platform where people could compare plans, check eligibility for subsidies, and sign up for
coverage.
How Scope Creep Happened:
Frequent Policy & Requirement Changes
The project originally started with simpler requirements, but as political
debates and policy changes evolved, new regulations had to be incorporated
mid-development.
Developers had to rebuild key components multiple times due to changes in
eligibility rules, enrollment processes, and security policies.
Unrealistic Timeline & Expanding Scope
The government set a fixed launch date (October 1, 2013), but kept adding
new features along the way.
The project was too large, instead of a phased rollout, it was expected to go
live nationwide all at once.
Lack of Clear Coordination
Multiple contractors worked on different parts of the system, but there was no
centralized oversight to manage the expanding scope.
Testing and debugging were rushed because the scope kept changing up until
the launch.
Massive Technical Failures
On launch day, millions of users tried to access the site, but poor scalability
planning caused it to crash repeatedly.
Many users faced error messages, slow load times, and incomplete
enrollments because the backend system wasn’t prepared for the volume.
Budget Overruns & Fixes After Launch
The initial budget was estimated at $93 million, but after multiple fixes and
rework, the cost soared past $2.1 billion.
The government had to bring in Amazon Web Services (AWS) and Google
engineers to stabilize the site after its disastrous launch.
Key Takeaways:
✅ Scope creep + fixed deadlines = disaster
Expanding requirements without adjusting
timelines leads to failure.
✅ Incremental rollout is safer
Instead of launching nationwide, a phased approach
would have reduced risks.
✅ Better change control is crucial
Unchecked feature additions caused instability and
delays.
✅ Proper testing matters
The system wasn’t tested under real-world conditions, leading
to catastrophic failures.