Stop small client requests from quietly consuming project margin. Use this practical scope creep and change control process for agency and consultancy projects.
Hourglass Editorial Team
Hourglass · 13 September 2026
Scope creep rarely arrives as a dramatic demand. It is more often a reasonable-sounding request in a call: one extra version, another stakeholder review, or a small change to a deliverable. Each request may be easy to accept. Together, they can consume the margin on a fixed-fee project. A useful change process should make decisions clear without turning every conversation into contract theatre.
Before delivery begins, write down the outputs, assumptions, number of review rounds, client responsibilities and acceptance criteria. Include exclusions where they are likely to matter. "Website redesign" is too vague to support a scope discussion. "Six page templates, two review rounds, client supplies final copy" gives both sides something concrete.
The baseline should be easy for the project team to find. If only the salesperson has seen it, the people receiving requests cannot tell whether work is included.
When a new request arrives, log what the client wants, who asked, when it is needed and which agreed deliverable it changes. This is not a refusal. It creates a shared record so the team can answer accurately.
Use a simple response: "We can look at that. I'll check the impact on the agreed work, timing and fee, then come back to you." It keeps the relationship constructive while protecting the team from an accidental commitment.
Count more than the obvious build hours. A seemingly small change may need discovery, design, testing, project management and another approval round. Check whether it displaces existing work or moves a milestone. For each request, record the additional hours and roles required, the effect on the delivery date and other commitments, the additional fee if any, and what will be removed or deferred if the fee cannot change.
If the change costs £1,200 to deliver and the original project had £4,000 of expected gross profit, accepting it for free cuts that profit by 30%. That is a commercial decision, even if the client never sees the calculation.
Most requests have three sensible outcomes: include the work for an agreed extra fee, swap it for work of similar effort within the existing budget, or park it for a later phase. Put the agreed choice in writing, even when the answer is "no change to price".
Avoid silently adding new work to the current plan. The project budget and schedule should reflect the decision so the delivery lead is not measured against an obsolete baseline.
Once a week, look at open requests, approved changes and the project's forecast margin. This helps distinguish a client who asks many questions from a project that is actually accumulating unpaid work. It also creates evidence for the next proposal: repeated "small" requests may show that future projects need a larger review allowance or clearer assumptions.
Hourglass makes logged time and project budget consumption visible together, so the cost of extra work is visible as it happens rather than disappearing into a month-end spreadsheet — across both delivery tracking and project profitability views.
No. Clarification, correction of your own error and work already covered by the agreement belong in the original scope. The baseline and acceptance criteria help you distinguish them.
Use one when the request changes the fee, deadline, deliverables or material assumptions. A short written record is usually enough for smaller changes.
Stop and estimate the remaining impact. Explain the position to the client promptly, then agree how the unfinished work will be handled. Delay makes the conversation harder.
A shared baseline, a log for every request, and its cost made visible before it's accepted — so scope changes are a decision, not a leak.
Project profitability, utilisation tracking, resource planning — all in one platform built for UK professional services firms.
Get started freeNo credit card required · Setup in minutes