Change request triage

Is this change a strategic pivot, or scope creep? Two questions that tell a strategic pivot from scope creep, and what to do about each, before a change request derails your programme.

01Does the change serve the programme’s core objective?

Not “would it be good?”, but “does it directly serve what this programme exists to do?”

Yes No

02Is it driven by validated learning or significant new evidence?

For example, strong feedback from users, a change in policy or regulation, a new technology, or a competitor’s move.

Yes No

Potential scope creep

Put it through change control, and expect the answer to be no

If a change does not serve the programme’s core objective, it is likely a nice-to-have or someone’s pet feature.

Ask for a documented request that sets out the full impact on cost, schedule, resources and risk
Make a conscious trade-off: what would this replace?
Say no by default, unless a new and compelling business case justifies it

A candidate strategic pivot

Don’t just approve the change: re-assess the plan

A change that serves the objective and is backed by new evidence may mean the whole direction should change, not just this one item.

Commission a lean update to the business case, in light of the new evidence
Re-examine the value, costs and benefits
Make a documented decision to change course, with a new plan, a revised budget and updated measures of success

Likely gold-plating

Reject it through change control, and keep the team on the priorities

A change that serves the objective but is not backed by new evidence is usually an attempt to improve something already fit for purpose.

Thank whoever raised it, and record it for later
Keep the resources on the core, prioritised deliverables
Revisit it only if new evidence emerges

Private by designEverything is calculated in your browser. Nothing you enter is sent to us or anyone else.

01The method

How it works

Change is constant in any complex programme. The leader’s job is to tell apart two very different kinds: scope creep, an unmanaged reaction that erodes value, and a strategic pivot, a managed response to new evidence that creates it.

Telling them apart

Attribute	Scope creep	Strategic pivot
Driver	Stakeholder whim, unclear requirements, “wouldn’t it be good if…”	Validated learning, user feedback, a change in policy, a competitor’s move
Process	Informal, undocumented, “just a small change”	Formal and documented, based on a re-evaluation of the business case
Budget	Uncontrolled increases that erode contingency	A conscious re-allocation, sometimes a new funding tranche

The question to ask is not “can we do this?” but “should we, and what is the evidence?”

From the article

17 Aug 2025 · 19 min read

Scope Creep or Strategic Pivot? How to Manage Changing Requirements Without Derailing Your Project

How leaders can tell costly scope creep from a smart strategic pivot, and govern changing requirements without derailing the programme.

Want a second opinion on your numbers?

Tell us what the tool showed you. We will help you test the assumptions and work out a practical next step.

Talk it through with us

02Tools