Every construction project changes. That's reality. The question isn't whether changes will happen, but whether those changes go through a formal contractual process or quietly accumulate without authorization. That distinction separates scope changes from scope creep, and it's one of the most consequential distinctions you'll encounter on the PjM exam and in practice.

A scope change is a deliberate, documented modification to the project's agreed-upon requirements. It follows a defined process: someone identifies the need, the change gets evaluated for cost and schedule impact, the appropriate parties authorize it in writing, and the contract documents get updated. The project moves forward with everyone aligned.

Scope creep is the opposite. It's the gradual, often invisible expansion of project requirements without formal review, authorization, or corresponding adjustments to budget and schedule. Sometimes it's a client asking for "just one more thing" in a meeting. Sometimes it's a contractor proceeding on verbal approval without written authorization. Either way, nobody updated the contract, nobody adjusted the fee, and the project team absorbs the cost.

The Federal Transit Administration identifies scope creep as the single greatest threat to project success. And the consequences aren't just financial. Uncontrolled scope growth undermines project baselines, compromises quality, strains professional relationships, and creates legal exposure for architects whose services quietly expand beyond their contracted obligations.

Understanding how to identify each one, and knowing what contractual mechanisms exist to handle them, is critical for both the exam and for protecting your practice.