Can change records reveal scope drift in outsourced roles?

Scope: compare the approved starting brief for one outsourced role with every documented change over a defined six-month window. Include added and retired tasks, tool permissions, decision rights, review duties, schedule changes, and acceptance criteria.

Methodology: construct a dated change history from approved briefs, access records, tickets, and decision logs. Classify changes by risk and whether the accountable owner approved them before use. Verify unclear events with the record owner, retain unknowns, and report both the number and substance of changes.

Inference boundaries: NIST and GAO inform governance and change records. Department of Labor material explains why worker classification depends on applicable facts and law. None of these sources determines a site-specific classification, proves harmful drift, or substitutes for legal review.

Limitations: missing early records, renamed tasks, temporary coverage, and undocumented verbal decisions can distort the history. One role cannot represent a provider or country. The review detects differences in recorded scope; it does not decide legal status, intent, or business value. References are listed below.