In my opinion, finding the right balance between scope and innovation in medical device projects can be challenging. It is smart to prioritize changes. If the innovation doesn't match the main goals or timelines, it can be put off for a later phase. It's important to have meetings with stakeholders to keep them informed and explain any changes to the scope and the risks involved. So, this can be a good way to ensure that while you're pushing the boundaries, you're still remaining compliant.

I believe that innovation can include both adding to the process or removing from the process in order to achieve a better result. If an innovation can expedite the project, while still maintaining the original scope and goals, then there is no reason to refuse implementing the innovation. Every project manager surely desires to meet the timeline, and even finishing the project before the projected due date. Now, for pushing the boundaries of the scope, this is where wisdom comes in to play. If the innovation is relevant but not necessary, the project manager can decide to postpone implementing the innovation until after the current project is done. However, if a certain idea, if implemented, will exceed expectations, it may be a good idea to push the deadline. As much as deadlines and scope is important, the team members working on the project discover so much more once the project begins. A bird's eye view of the project is vastly different than an in project view. It depends on the severity of the deadline and scope. In my experience in the industry, "everything that can go wrong, will go wrong". It is not wrong to anticipate short comings or delays. If a delay comes at the cost of improving the project, is it a delay? Or is it a necessary part of the project that should have been there all along?

Balancing scope and innovation is definitely challenging, especially in medical device development where timelines and regulations are strict. I think that it is key to distinguish between necessary innovation that improves safety or compliance and the 'nice-to-have' changes that could push the project off track.

If the innovation closely aligns with the original objectives and won’t cause major delays, it could be worth pursuing. But if it risks budget issues or timeline disruptions, it might be better to save it for a future phase. Overall, clear communication with project stakeholders and weighing the risks is crucial in making these decisions.

In medical device development, project managers must find a balance between sticking to the project plan and making room for new ideas. One way to handle this is by carefully reviewing incoming innovations and see how they might affect aspects like timelines, costs, and compliance. This helps teams stay on track while still leaving space for improvements. Even though pushing beyond the original scope can cause delays and extra costs, managing changes thoughtfully can lead to a better product without throwing off the whole project. In the end, it's all about finding the right balance between innovation and control to deliver a successful product without losing sight of the project's original goals.

I think pushing scope can be a great thing, as long as you are not pushing deadlines past any hard points that were set during the Initiation and Planning stages. Whenever possible, cost/benefit analysis of adding scope should be done, and if the benefits are not tangible, or the costs of an addition will push either the budget or schedule too far beyond projection, the addition should either be scrapped, or more ideally noted down for inclusion in a future project, either as a feature/task or as the main focus.