How do you evaluate and approve change requests?

??#Process and #Documentation are key in an #asynchronous work environment; ?? Programming change requests are part of those key #systems ??In a asynchronous #workplace the primary #mode of communication is writing: #IM, #PMP Software, cloud tools ??At the end of the work day, we spend <10 minutes writing a three point #summary of the days major #events; these summaries go in our #Smartsheet PMP software ??The #output of this daily employee feedback process is fed into an #ExpertSystem to generate new project #knowledge. ??Requests for change to the project are much easier to see when the #feedback and #changerequests are written and consumed by a computer program designed to help make sense of them #leadership #management #coding ??

If you have a large number of external and internal stakeholders that regularly request change, your unique identifier code should show whether the change is from an internal or external requester. (A letter to denote this would be sufficient.) Establish a standard method for requesting a change and make it simple otherwise experience tells me that people will circumvent it and try to implement the change anyway.

This is a question to which there are a number of options depending on the type of project you're managing, from hybrid, iterative, agile, to waterfall. Whichever type of project you're managing should determine the correct practice and approach to evaluate the impact of the change request in itself. Next, a thorough quantitative as well as qualitative analysis should be done to project any risks or opportunities as well as feasibility. From there, Communication methods will always be a key factor in this request in order to transfer information or data to the correct source or sources in order to receive, analyze and carry out or not the request for change in itself. These principles and this method should always be the foundation.

It is very essential to have a clear distinctions between the change description, and the change reason. the change description should tackle directly what needs to be changed in the project baseline and deliverables. the change reason is to clarify why this change needs to be implemented, and what are the implications of its implementation on the project initial assumptions and business case.

One of the challenges of change management is that organizations often do not like to acknowledge that change might be necessary in the future. This can lead to costly decisions being made, as the organization may be forced to make changes later on that could have been avoided if they had been acknowledged earlier. Another challenge of change management is that it can be difficult to get all of the stakeholders to agree on a change request. This is especially true when the change request will have a significant impact on the project.

This is where having good relationships with your stakeholder really come to play. Your analysis should output a recommendation. To ensure your change requests don't hang around on the register for weeks/months, influence your stakeholders for a quick decision so you can continue to focus on your deliverables. Otherwise, you'll find yourself becoming a spreadsheet manager.

It's always a good idea to potentially get the input/perspective of the individuals or teams that the change will directly affect. The most successful project managers will use all the knowledge at their disposal to make the most informed and realistic solutions! #teamwork #toolbelt #brainstorming

The Analysis has to be holistic. It has to answer the Where? Why? What? Where is it coming from? Where does the stakeholder rank on the Power/Impact Grid. Why was the change requested? What will be the successful Future State if the change request is approved. Also ask the same question if the request is denied. What else would the change request impact in the project? Perform a System Analysis to see what other parts of the project will be affected. That's how I analyze and appraise Change Requests Cheers

It is good to use various analysis tools to handle change requests. Sometimes schedule may not permit the PD ( Project DIRECTOR) to wait for results of such analysis. Here ability to take quick decision based on some expert advise may become useful.

Authority to approve change requests can come from many different stakeholders so it is critical to make sure all approvals are captured, per stakeholder registries and project RACI. The time needed to secure approvals should also be accounted for in the overall schedule, and evaluation of the change request impact to schedule.

Change control is one of the foundational step for being agile...the cause for change could be anything or anyone.but approving or rejecting must be based on the approval from change control board where they look in to various aspects but mostly focusing on positive and negative impacts in cost ,capacity, quality and schedule.

Change control is one of the foundational step for being agile...the cause for change could be anything or anyone.but approving or rejecting must be based on the approval from change control board where they look in to various aspects but mostly focusing on positive and negative impacts in cost ,capacity, quality and schedule.

I fully agree with this. Documentation of change request -such as accepted or rejected or partially accepted or modified should be documented along with the implication on cost and time schedule. This has to be approved by Programe Director before going ahead with change requests.

In my experience, this step proved very helpful. I got the chance to speak to the supervisors of the team. They all listened to the details and provided me with further directions to work with.

Let me explain with an example of my personal experience. I was handling project , on of the key element was to be delivered by a prestigious professional organisation. During the execution of project they carried out several changes based o oral change requests from site engineers and administrators with out following it up with email comunication on cost. Later they came up with a big cost reimbursement that had no prior approval. Ultimately they had to absorb the cost since they had no support of documentation. Therefore, timely documentation and communication to all stakeholders before carrying out change requests are absolutely necessary.

Don't fear to be boring or tedious while informing the client (as well as your team) about all the influence caused by any change request as thoroughly as needed. And it's always better to do it in a written from to have a prove later.

I agree, however, there was no mention of SRD update process or Configuration Management (CM) Document update process upon acceptance of the change(s). These are vital Software Systems Engineering documents in SDLC or Agile Software Development methodologies. Furthermore, these documents with correct versioning and release information should be shared. Collaboration and communication of change orders and appropriate documentation release information providing by appropriate authorities and/or parties is of essence.

A very good article. It is better include change request clause in contract to avoid problems of handling it later- like change request procedure, approving authority etc.

I think in the project we need to figth to keep the previous scope, but some times we need to get changes during the proccess. In my point of view document all changes and analises if still in the previous budget and time schedule.

While most projects benefit from well structured change management procedures, governed by a committee of stakeholders, it is often important to assign key decision authorities or deadlines to approvals that can resolve consensus delays. It can be harmful to valuable resource consumption or project outcomes to hold extensive review or debate on change requests, that can stall when no decisions are made on defined timelines.