How do you manage scope creep in software design?

Really, that is bad advice. Defining requirements clearly and to fine detail up-front when you have learned the least is causing scope creep. Defer as much as possible until you have learned better. Until then, keep scope definitions abstract.

* In today's world, one thing is for there forever & that is "Change", so 1st of all accept it * We are into Agile methodology where everybody knows that Before/After go live, there will be change, so accept it. * Plan discovery phase, Define line items, workflows, mindmaps, UML diagrams (incl. sequence diagram for developers & so on), create mock-ups, wireframes & in last requirements sign off. This will give more clarity to all stakeholders including developers & all are accountable for the defined requirements. * Define MVP & then define rest in multiple phases based on business priorities to limit the scope to reduce the "Time to Market".

To manage scope creep in software development, establish clear requirements, implement a change control process for scope changes, prioritize features using techniques like MoSCoW, maintain open communication with stakeholders, conduct thorough impact analyses, allocate buffers for contingencies, educate stakeholders about the implications of changes, and consider an iterative approach while documenting all approved changes for reference. Regularly track and monitor project progress against the baseline scope to ensure alignment.

To avoid scope creep including deep clear details in the scope document may not be enough. Ambiguity always creeps in. To tighten up and build better consensus, in addition to scope details always include assumptions, inclusions and exclusions. This will help you plug in the holes.

There has to be a happy medium between 'Big Design Upfront' and 'Jumping Straight to Implementation.' It would help to understand the domain/problem and requirements. The clarity in the requirements saves a lot of rework. Agility is to respond to change. It is incorrect to categorize the scope creep as changes that arose due to a lack of u understanding and exploration rather than market-driven changes.

Insist that the stakeholders approach the project with the same discipline that the implementation practitioners do. We estimate level of effort. They should estimate ROI. When prioritizing features. Do not use the MOSCOW method, You will find that everything becomes a "must have" if allowed. However, you rank priorities insist that you have an equal number of choices fall within each ranking category. Then your stakeholders are involved in decision making in a real way, where resources are limited and not everything can be done. If you can invest some time into instilling some engineering discipline early it will pay off in the long run, and you will have happier stakeholders because they were treated with respect.

Tailor the communication to suit the stakeholders. Engineers tend to use technical jargon and abstract terms. Visual interfaces and prototypes showing the workflow would help greatly to solidify understanding.

Apart from what is mentioned here we should also consider the people who can have their have their impression on the system, for e.g. 3rd party integrator Device supplier if any DevOps team Development/Implementation partners Track their final feedbacks, consider those while doing estimation. This will reduce the risk and implications on the project in the longer run.

Is the change a core requirement (part of MVP)? Tabulate the benefits and costs in terms of time and effort, and that would give a clear understanding of the priority and choice.

There should be a well defined difference between nice to have , business needs and user needs for example having a nice chat personalise chat bolt in a live video conference might be cool but might not be useful if the platform and its users only use the platform to share updates to remote workers who don't use the platform after the meeting/ video conference. The ability for under what and how users will use features or modules of a software is critical before adding changes to a software.

Reviewing the ROI of the changes implemented will serve as a guideline to tune further change control processes. Also comparing the estimated ROI and the actual realized ROI will help.

According to Newton's Third Law: (Action & Reaction) To for every action (force) in nature there is an equal and opposite reaction This law is valid in the SDLC in every stage the drawback is that some teams don't always have a means set up to receive, record and monitor the Equal and opposite reaction from every stage , Monitoring tools should be adopted across all levels of the SDLC

Lessoned learned what one should always look for and this is going to play a important role when it comes to what all can be improved for the next phase/project/implementation/delivery. These data should be collected periodically and should not be limited to after phase/project completion. It can be after sprint completion/sprint demo/new feature went live. For e.g. after discovery phase of one project when you start for another project, one will surely add the process/flow (may be very small one) in the next discovery phase Software industry is always about what you are learning from what you have done till last minute. Develop a passion for learning. If you do, you will never cease to grow

Some of the best advice on this topic I got from Mary Poppendieck: "If you have requirements churn you are gathering the requirements too early". If you really must work projects, define the requirements only at an abstract level at the start of the project. Firm them up "just in time" and a small batch at a time. Do that and you will have very little scope creep.

Scope creep is typically only relevant on projects that are not "Agile"/Iterative. This is why iterative development is key to developing software and processes that are constantly changing. When focusing either on the user or the process in a step-by-step manner things you thought were important day one, might not be what needs to get done as you are constantly monitoring and reviewing.