Scope Creep Examples — Web development
A new CTO wants a different architecture than the one that was signed
A new engineering leader joins the client side mid-build and wants to replace the agreed tech stack — a scope and cost change the original SOW never priced.
The SOW specifies a particular stack and hosting approach, agreed with the client's prior technical lead. Partway through the build, a newly hired CTO reviews the codebase and wants a different framework and a migration to a different cloud provider — reasonable technical opinions in isolation, but a substantial rebuild of work already in progress, not an adjustment to it. The prior sign-off doesn't disappear because the person who gave it left.
Clause typically implicated
Clause typically implicated
Change order clause→ — A new technical decision-maker's preferences still route through the same formal estimate-and-approval process as any other scope change.
Suggested change-order wording
Suggested change-order wording (illustrative, not legal advice)
Good to connect. For context: the current SOW is built against [stack/hosting], agreed with [prior contact]. Moving to [new stack/hosting] mid-build means re-architecting work already completed, not just adjusting it going forward. I can put together an estimate for the migration as a distinct phase — want me to scope that out before we change direction on the current sprint?
How this usually resolves
Quantifying the cost of the pivot — specifically, how much already-built work gets thrown away versus reused — is usually what turns this into a real decision rather than an assumed one; once the CTO sees the number, the choice is often to finish the current build as signed and revisit architecture on a v2.
Related reading