#7 Project Management Failures - Scope Creep

Almost all Projects face challenges (I could say here: ALL PROJECTS FAIL), but some become monumental defeats.

The building of Sydney Opera House is a prime example.

The main reason of BIG FAILURES is called "Scope Creep" (in Project Management terminology).

Let's explore why Sydney Opera House is considered one of the biggest Project Management failures. ?? and which are the 9 questions I make in order to reduce the likelihood of Scope Creep.

--

A. ARCHITECTURAL PLANNING AND FEASIBILITY

In 1957, Danish architect J?rn Utzon presented a visionary design for the Sydney Opera House—iconic sail-like shells that captivated the world. ???

However, the design lacked detailed plans. ???

The innovative roof required engineering solutions that didn't exist. ???

Multiple modifications were made to make the structure feasible. ????

Consequences:

The budget skyrocketed from AU$7 million to over AU$102 million. ????

Completion was pushed from 4 to 14 years. ???

Utzon (the Architect) resigned amid mounting pressures. ????

--

B. GOVERNMENT CHANGES IN REQUIREMENTS

During construction, the government introduced new demands:

Extra theaters and facilities were added. ???

Interior spaces were redesigned mid-project. ?????

Upgrades to acoustics and amenities were requested. ???

Consequences:

Existing work had to be altered or redone. ????

Each change compounded expenses and timelines. ???

--

THEREFORE:

The Sydney Opera House stands today as an architectural marvel ????, but it can also teach us how Scope Creep can derail a project. ????

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How to avoid Scope Creep in Project Management ?????

Here are the 9 most crucial questions I would ask stakeholders to manage and prevent Scope Creep: ???

FIRST STAGE: CLARITY, STRUCTURE, AUTHORITY ??

1?? What does success look like?

This creates a shared understanding and mainly prevents deviations by ensuring every future decision is weighed against the defined objectives. ??

2?? Which are the three absolute & non-negotiable requirements of this project?

This helps distinguish between "must-have" and "nice-to-have" features, avoiding scope creep caused by lower-priority items being added mid-project. ??

3?? What is our process for handling change requests?

By establishing a formal process (e.g., with clear impact assessments, prioritization, and stakeholder approval), the project team can prevent changes from sneaking in without a full understanding of the consequences. ??

4?? Who is responsible for final decisions on scope changes?

Different stakeholders often push for uncoordinated changes. Having a clear chain of command streamlines decision-making. ??

SECOND STAGE: COLLABORATION AND EXPECTATIONS (BUDGET, TIME, QUALITY, RISKS) ??

5?? How much extra budget do we have available for any changes to the project?

This introduces financial discipline ?? and ensures we all set realistic expectations around change requests.

6?? What is the timeline flexibility?

Even small features can extend deadlines significantly. ?? If the timeline is fixed, this question helps prioritize necessary changes only.

7?? What are the potential risks if we do not manage scope creep effectively?

This question raises awareness among stakeholders so they understand the broader risks (e.g., project failure, budget overruns, missed deadlines). ??

8?? Which stakeholders are most affected by scope changes, and how do we ensure their cost is acceptable?

This ensures that all key stakeholders are considered in the decision-making process and that changes are made with full awareness of their broader impact. ??

9?? What are our priorities if we face trade-offs between time, cost, and scope?

This helps the project team make informed decisions when trade-offs arise. It also prepares stakeholders to compromise when necessary. ??