# How to compare a client request with the original scope A client asks for another piece of work. Before discussing a new fee or deadline, find out what the current agreement actually says. Put the request beside the relevant wording and note where they match, where they differ and what remains unclear. Canonical: https://areinum.com/guides/compare-client-request-with-original-scope/ Language: en Updated: 2026-10-31 ## Find the agreement you are comparing against Use the proposal, service order or project plan the parties accepted, including any later confirmed changes. Record its title, version, date and relevant section. An older draft may no longer describe the current work. Keep the original request beside your summary. Separate the result requested from the method: a new landing page and two extra design rounds are different things to compare. ## Compare the wording, one request at a time Mark a request Included when the agreed wording clearly describes it, Unclear when the wording or evidence leaves a question, and Not described when the relevant materials do not cover it. Give the section or message supporting your classification. If an agreement or later change is missing, keep the question open. Ask the person who owns the account to locate it rather than treating the missing record as evidence that nothing was agreed. 1. Identify the request and source message. 2. Find the accepted baseline and later changes. 3. Record the match and the evidence, then name the question that remains. ## Three requests against a fictional service order In the fictional worksheet, a service order lists campaign setup and management but does not mention qualification calls. That request is marked Not described and goes forward for a separate discussion. A landing page is Unclear because the plan says campaign creative is included without naming its components. A request for four monthly ad variations matches the quantity in the sample order and is marked Included. The entries, clauses, names and dates are fictional. Use the supplementary worksheet with your own actual sources. ## Turn the comparison into a useful question Show the client the relevant wording and ask whether there is another agreement or context to consider. If the request may require a change, prepare its impact and decision in a separate change record. The comparison alone does not authorize the extra work or change the schedule. If the parties disagree about the agreement, preserve the source documents and involve the person responsible for resolving the issue. A working classification does not settle legal rights. ## Prepare a side-by-side view with Areinum You can ask Areinum Assistant to organize the supplied request and scope excerpts into a comparison with open questions. Check the excerpts against the full agreement and decide how to discuss the result. ## Questions you may have ### Does ‘not described’ mean the request is legally excluded? It means the reviewer did not find it in the materials compared. The actual agreement and any later changes still need to be considered. ### What if the client refers to a later email? Find that email and check whether it records an agreed change. Update the comparison while retaining the earlier source. ### When should I open a change register? Once the comparison shows a possible addition, use a separate record to describe the impact and seek a decision. ## Sources and further reading - [First agency client wants me to take over lead qualification/follow-up, how should I price this?](https://www.reddit.com/r/agency/comments/1ww3tz3/first_agency_client_wants_me_to_take_over_lead/): An agency owner describes a later request for lead qualification and follow-up. The worksheet is a separate illustrative method; the post gives only one person's account. The agreement and the client's position are not independently confirmed. The author says lead qualification and follow-up were requested after an initial service had been discussed. This provides an adjacent example for comparing a request with a baseline. This single Reddit post is self-reported and does not verify the writer, the agreement, or the client's position. It does not establish a typical agency contract or prove that a particular request was legally outside scope. (2026-10-18) Download the original worksheet: https://areinum.com/guides/compare-client-request-with-original-scope/request-scope-comparison.csv ## Request-to-Scope Comparison Worksheet All project names, scope clauses, requests, owners, and dates are fictional. | Request ID | Request summary | Scope document and version | Relevant section or wording | Match classification | Reason and evidence | Open question | Decision owner | Next review date | Change register reference | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | RQ-031 | Take over initial lead qualification calls, fictional | Service order v1, fictional | Section 2 lists campaign setup and management; no call-handling task is named | Not described | The request adds a separate activity based on the listed services | Does the client want a separate proposal for calls and follow-up? | Morgan Lee, fictional | 2026-10-21 | CH-012, fictional | | RQ-032 | Prepare a landing page for the campaign, fictional | Campaign plan v2, fictional | Section 4 says campaign creative is included but does not name a landing page | Unclear | The type and amount of creative work are not specified | Was a landing page included in the approved deliverables? | Riley Chen, fictional | 2026-10-22 | Not opened | | RQ-033 | Provide four monthly ad variations, fictional | Service order v1, fictional | Section 2 lists four monthly ad variations | Included | The requested quantity and deliverable match the cited wording | Does the current creative brief change the content requirements? | Jamie Park, fictional | 2026-10-20 | Not needed unless scope changes | 1. Use one row per new request and identify the scope document version before comparing wording. 2. Choose Included, Unclear, or Not described, then write the evidence behind that classification. 3. If wording or a source is missing, record a question and keep the classification Unclear until it is answered. 4. Use a separate change register only after the request has been compared with the original scope and may require a change. 5. All project names, clauses, requests, and dates are fictional. These classifications are working notes, not legal decisions. ### Limits of this method - The evidence is one self-reported post, and the page's broader use for client scope comparisons remains a hypothesis. - A working classification is not a legal decision. Interpret the actual agreement with the people responsible for it. - The examples are invented to explain the comparison method. They do not establish a standard clause or a standard service boundary. ## Related reading - [How to record added project scope before extra work starts](https://areinum.com/guides/record-added-project-scope-before-extra-work/) Explore the demo: https://platform.areinum.com/ The demo is in English. Access may need to be arranged.