Scope Creep of a Training Project
There are many situations in which a project, whether
personal or professional does not go as planned. Unexpected changes such as additional
activities being added in the middle of the project, someone on the project
team leaving the department, or the stakeholders decide they want to move the project in a
different direction. Even though changes are likely to happen in a project,
there are ways that the individual who is managing the project can help control
the scope of the project in order to get it back on track. In this week’s blog
posting, I will be discussing a professional project that experienced issues
related to scope creep.
So, what is scope creep?
According
to Reference.com (2012), scope creep is when there are uncontrolled changes in
the scope of a project. This can happen when a project is not properly defined,
managed, or controlled. (Dictionary.com, LLC., 2012). Ultimately, this can
cause much frustration among the project team and the project manager.
Project
Background: A specific process that was being processed by staff in certain department
was going to be handed-off and managed by staff in a different department
within the organization. The new department did not know how to complete the
steps in the process, so the employees needed to be trained on the new process.
Some of the steps in the process were changing with the hand-off to the new
department. Initially, eight weeks were provided to design, develop, and
deliver the training for the staff once the content was handed off to the
instructional designer.
Scope Creep
Issues: First,
once the designer began to develop the training, she discovered that the
process steps were more complex than what was originally presented in the project
kickoff, planning, and hand-off meetings. The instructional designer realized
that more information needed to be obtained in order to create proper training
for the staff and would require additional time to complete. As she looked at
the project plan dates and her calendar, she knew there would not be enough
time to develop a high quality training session for the staff. Secondly, assumptions
were made by the stakeholders that the additional information would not hinder
project being completed as scheduled. However, once the stakeholders began
reviewing the training material a couple of weeks later, they realized the
content in the material needed to be presented in a certain way in order for
the process steps to make sense to the staff being trained on the process. Ultimately,
what was supposed to be an eight week project, turned into a six month project!
What could
have been done differently? If I had been in the position of managing the project, there are
several methods I would employ to help manage these issues more effectively and
control the scope of the project. First, I would have utilized the Change of
Scope Document as Dr. Stolovich discusses in the first video this week titled “Monitoring
Projects.” I would require the stakeholders to agree to the changes outlined in
the document and provide approval. According Portney et al (2008), a change
control system should be implemented in all project plans and should require
approval in writing (Portney et al, 2008). In addition, I would ensure to
analyze the overall impact of the change. According to Greer (2010, p. 36), the
exact scope of the change should be clearly analyzed, including the “schedule,
quality of the finished product, costs, project team assignments, including
level of effort, and other deliverables, including their amount and quality”
(Greer, p. 36, 2010). By clearly analyzing the complete scope of the changes,
this allows the project manager to determine how the project will be impacted
at all levels.
References
Dictionary.com, LLC. (2012). Scope creep. Retrieved October 11,
2012 http://www.reference.com/browse/Scope_creep
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.
2 comments:
Jackie,
This is an excellent example of scope creep. I have no experience with REAL project management so your real world examples are very enlightening to me.
My first question is: had a project schedule and scope of work been developed? Who developed these?
Your recommendations to manage the project seem dead on to me.
Every project requires the management of five variables: time, resources, expertise, quality, and scope (Laureate Education, 2012). It appears that this project had quality expertise but in order to deliver a quality product, the time given was obviously not enough.
Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2012). "Practitioner Voices: Barriers to Project Success " [Video webcast]. Retrieved from https://class.waldenu.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_1373694_1%26url%3D
It seems there are a couple different definitions of scope creep; the more generalized consisting of uncontrollable changes to the scope of a project and a more specific addition of features or quality to a project. Portny et al do not define all change as scope creep insisting that change in a project is inevitable and best managed through a “change control system” (2008, p. 346). In order too effectively manage a project of any magnitude requires a comprehensive analysis of the work to be completed along with precise details regarding the results (Greer, 2010). The increase in scope of your project was a direct result of failing properly to define the project from the start. Portny et al has a couple of things to say about assumptions. First, all assumptions should be documented and agreed upon by all relevant participants. Second, all assumptions are indicators of potential risk and should be considered for contingency planning. Ultimately, the project took three times longer than originally estimated with no real change in the deliverable, which was to design, develop, and deliver training for a process. It seems someone ended up with a little egg on his or her face, so to speak.
References
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.
Post a Comment