Agree project scope before accepting extra requests

A project can expand through perfectly reasonable requests. An extra page, another revision or a new reporting format may each seem small. The difficulty starts when nobody checks their combined effect on the original agreement. A clear scope makes change discussable; it does not prevent a client from developing a better idea.

Describe the promised result

Write down the deliverables, intended use and practical acceptance criteria. Include the inputs the client must provide, the review rounds included and relevant deadlines. Identify exclusions that could otherwise be assumed, such as ongoing maintenance after a one-off delivery.

Use language the client can recognise. “A finished presentation” may mean a slide deck to one person and a deck plus rehearsal and live event support to another. This fictional example shows why the output and related services need separate descriptions.

Distinguish a correction from a change

When a request arrives, compare it with the agreed result. Correcting your own error is different from adding a new audience, format or feature. If the distinction is unclear, discuss it against the written agreement instead of immediately treating the request as either free work or an unreasonable demand.

PMI’s discussion of scope change stresses a written baseline and clear communication when approved changes update it. Keep that principle proportionate: a small assignment may need a short, understandable confirmation rather than a large approval framework.

Offer a decision with visible consequences

Explain what the request changes in effort, timing, dependencies and price. Where useful, offer alternatives: replace an existing item, defer the addition or extend the assignment. Do not promise an earlier date simply because the new request sounds urgent.

State which assumptions your estimate depends on. If a client decision or missing content blocks the work, make that dependency visible. Give the client enough information to choose, rather than asking for approval of a vague “additional effort”.

Record the revised agreement

Confirm what was accepted, by whom and what happens to the earlier plan. Update the working scope and schedule so the team is not using two conflicting versions. Use the agreed contractual process; seek appropriate professional advice for legal questions or disputes.

Review repeated additions at the end of the project. They may reveal a service that should be included in your next proposal, an unclear briefing question or an unrealistic revision allowance. Better scoping grows from these observations, rather than from making every future contract longer.

Sources: Project Management Institute: Scope creep ... not necessarily a bad thing.