Scope Creep Examples — Web development
A second technical approach, after the first was already approved
The client signed off on an architecture and feature approach in writing. Deep into the build, they ask for an entirely different approach explored in parallel.
The technical approach was presented with two options at kickoff, and the client formally approved one in writing before the build started. Several sprints in, with real work already built on that approach, the client asks the team to also spike out the other option "just to see" — not a bug or a blocker with the current approach, just curiosity about the road not taken, well after the decision was made and built on.
Clause typically implicated
Clause typically implicated
Acceptance testing clause→ — A written technical sign-off is meant to close the decision — exploring the alternative afterward is new work, not part of what was approved.
Suggested change-order wording
Suggested change-order wording (illustrative, not legal advice)
The current approach was approved on [date] and several sprints of work are now built on it. A parallel spike of the alternative would mean pulling a developer off active work to explore something we've already moved past — I can scope that as a separate exploratory task at [X] hours if it's genuinely needed, but wanted to flag the cost before starting it.
How this usually resolves
This is usually worth a short conversation about what's actually driving the request — if it's a real concern about the current approach, that's worth hearing out properly rather than declining outright; if it's idle curiosity, naming the cost of a parallel spike is usually enough to redirect the client's attention back to shipping what was approved.
Related reading