China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Software Engineering Domain
Published in Marvin Gechman, Project Management of Large Software-Intensive Systems, 2019
Uncontrolled changes or continuous growth in the planned scope of a project is called requirements creep (it may also be called scope creep, function creep or feature creep). It usually occurs when the scope of a project is poorly defined or not well documented or controlled. There will be necessary changes that as the Project Manager you have no control of, but you must manage them because uncontrolled changes can have a significant impact on cost, schedule and quality. Lessons Learned. Requirements creep is a common risk. It is difficult to avoid and remains a challenge for even the most experienced Project Managers. You should have a mitigation plan ready to go because changes and growth are a certainty for large and complex projects. Requirements creep usually results in cost overruns because many Project Managers do not plan for it even though they know it will happen. If you plan in advance for it, you can have budget reserve plus the resources and schedule that can be increased along with the requirements increases. These changes could be considered an acceptable addition and not an item of risk because you “planned” for it (but you may be accused of rationalizing the risk).
Change Management
Published in Gary L. Richardson, Brad M. Jackson, Project Management Theory and Practice, 2018
Gary L. Richardson, Brad M. Jackson
Scope creep refers to previously unplanned and unexpected changes in user expectations and requirements as a project progress, whereas feature creep refers to similar requested additions of features to a system. In both cases, changes of this type may appear minor, but often bring with them unseen consequences resulting from underlying technology failure or inability to manage the changing work requirements. PMs who are not sensitive to these subtle interactions inside the system will approve what appears to be isolated changes, only to find out later that there were other related implications that further increased project work (i.e., interactions with other areas, risk, quality, etc.) (Neimat, 2005).
Getting Started
Published in David Shirley, Project Management for Healthcare, 2020
Feature Creep – Feature creep happens more often that you think. It occurs when a team member decides that there is an additional feature, in the case of software development, or some additional “nicety” that the customer would like, without any consideration for the project's change control system, or how the change may affect the project as a whole. This can also be called “gold plating,” giving the customer more than they asked for at no cost to them, and usually with a cost to the provider. If all project members are educated in the change control process, especially the reasons it is in place, then feature creep usually isn't a problem.
A Situation Awareness Perspective on Human-AI Interaction: Tensions and Opportunities
Published in International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 2023
Jinglu Jiang, Alexander J. Karran, Constantinos K. Coursaris, Pierre-Majorique Léger, Joerg Beringer
As mentioned earlier, automation adds complexity to the system so that users may feel challenged to understand the system’s view of reality or the decisions it made. AI is inherently complex, and the extant literature has investigated various elements that may contribute to different types of complexity. For example, factors such as system components, features, objects, the interdependence of these components, degree of interactions, system dynamics like the pace of status change, and predictability of the dynamics contribute to system-level complexity (Endsley, 2016; Tegarden et al., 1995; Windt et al., 2008). An over-complex system may result from feature creep, which increases users’ mental workload and harms task performance since the entire system becomes difficult to understand (Page, 2009). However, a complex system does not necessarily mean that it is complex to use. For example, a self-driving car has complex automobile mechanics (e.g., more sensors, information fusion mechanisms, and diagnostic components), but the operation can be much less complex than a traditional car.
Community health integration through pharmacy process and ergonomics redesign (CHIPPER)
Published in Ergonomics, 2018
Michelle A. Jahn, Barrett S. Caldwell
Some features in pharmacy mobile application may cause issues upstream for community pharmacies. For example, one participant mentioned that they had duplicate medications in their medication history, which caused issues with dispensing. These concerns demonstrate a need for developers to conduct user research testing to understand the goals and needs of the end users (Beuscart-Zéphir et al. 2007) within the system context, as outlined by CHIPPER (Jahn 2015). Simply adding features without understanding the appropriate linkages between the affecting people, tasks and technology results can result in feature creep and unintended consequences that permeate throughout the system (Jahn 2015).