Project Scope Control (Also called Change Management)
If you have ever had to learn a new policy, procedure or protocol you have likely been affected by project scope changes. Whenever you are requested to change your operation you are given the choice to embrace it or to disgrace it. It’s not hard to fall into a resentful mindset about every little difference in your routine. It disrupts your work-flow, lowers your production and worst of all makes you question it’s functionality. What is it about change that can make some cringe?
It’s possible you are already recalling these moments in life and this is the importance of Scope and Change Control.
What does change mean? Not every request is a change to scope and not every request is considered small enough to *not* change the scope. There is a clear overlap. The need for change is sometimes obvious wherein a company experiences a merger (changing many aspects or only a few of a project) or competition has gained an edge (warranting desire for additions to a project). Regardless of the reason, change should be addressed in a control environment to prevent risk and to prevent overworking your team without compensating them properly.
The initiation of a project is not void of flexibility and defining your procedure for making adjustments is a must. The stack of specifications are not meant to keep the door closed to change but rather to point toward resolving any issue with ease. It is vital to have these elements in any project scope. Not only will these change management systems prevent contractors from under-bidding (engaging companies in a form of gouging where a contractor bids low and considers any change a “change to scope”, adding large fees to the original budget or leads a project outside of the scope in order to obtain additional work) but it also prevents any stuck feelings between the contractor and the company while keeping the focus.
Generally project scope control involves a simple procedure in which clients can voice opinions or concerns. It should be a simple form that probes lightly for severity, priority and what the call to action implies. The request should be filled out and issued to an assessor who can identify any risks then assign the validated request to action. This way nothing is outside of the project scope and companies can legitimately see the benefit vs. cost when requesting modifications.
