Scope Creep Vs Value based delivery

Arvind -

It's not an either/or situation - scope creep is unmanaged change. Regardless of the lifecycle used to deliver projects (adaptive or deterministic), the focus should always be on delivering business value and ensuring that changes are being appropriately managed whether that is via project change control or via discipline in how we manage our product backlogs.

Kiron

I understand the basis of the question, but without any value there is no project, thus no scope. Value delivery would be slotted and grouped by MVP and priority. Within each of those contexts is a set of work to be accomplished. So at this point, it is the feature that is the scope which will decompose as needed to achieve the intent.

In a traditional waterfall setting where the 'overall' scope is pre-defined there are still objectives to be met. The objectives are delivered through what is assumed to be a finite scope. Luckily, since we all know that is only in theory, we have a CM process to insert in where needed. The fun begins when deciding what falls under the umbrella of what is needed to deliver on the objective and what is 'extra' and can be slotted in the parking lot for later efforts/enhancements. Then there is the whole time/budget discussion which plays a role in those prioritization activities.