Change-Order Process and Resistance to Change - Essay Example

The prior meetings have been based upon the need to update the stakeholders on the progress of the project on far simpler issues. As a result, these past meetings have been much smoother, but this time, serious challenges that touch on the project scope will arise. These include; an extension of the project deadline by up to four weeks; the proposal for the implementation of a formal change-order process and managing the client’s resistance to change.

Timeline delay
Although, as a software project manager my mantra is keeping an eye on the time, and budget, sometimes the two issues may require adjustment due to unexpected issues that stem from the implementation process (Wysocki, 2010). Because most such projects are not completed within the timeline as agreed upon at the beginning of the project implementation process, this one is not an exception. This project is expected to delay by between one to four weeks due to changes in the requirements of the system.

More specifically, we have spent more time than we expected, waiting for new resources. The need to expand the functionality of technology to allow for a seamless way to monitor the various human resources functions has extended past the original scope. The client’s systems need “gold plating,” which is expected to consume more time than was expected. An extension of time to allow for the successful completion of the project and ensure that the deliverables are realized is therefore imperative. It is important to note that, even though the stakeholders came together to develop all their requirements before starting the project, system requirements have changed, making the project wait for the shipments of new product supplies.

Change-order Process
Owing to the variation of costs and the timeline for completing the project, change-order processes will help the stakeholders to make the necessary modifications to the original project plan and scope as a trade-off for the realization of quality project deliverables (Wysocki, 2010). The original agreement spelled out the structure of the network systems and the expected final result. However, due to the changes in the system requirements, the client needs to give in to extra funding to keep an eye on quality, as effective measures have been put in place to guard against project creep. More specifically, the stakeholders need to adjust to the new timeline for the completion of the project by at most four weeks to satisfy all the stakeholders’ new expectations. The client will be required to sign the change order form detailing the modified plan, including the system services, hardware and software, and designs as a way of formalizing a mutually binding agreement.

Resistance to change
This project had a clear scope within which to work, hence should be respected. However, because changes that arise during the implementation process are inevitable, all the stakeholders should work in tandem to respond to the changes reasonably and more appropriately to ensure that the final deliverables are achieved (Wysocki, 2010). The existence of new stakeholders is a major risk facing the project, even as some flexible stakeholders are striving not to compromise quality for limiting costs and the amount of time that is required to complete the remaining amount of work.

Whereas resistance can be perceived as wrong, it is important to view it as an alternative to the change process, because by considering the client’s reservations, the stakeholders will limit the risks of prolonging precious time or using an extra budget. The bringing of new members on board, during the project implementation of the project, poses risk to the success of the operations as they have a limited understanding of where the project is headed or where it has come from. The return of the old members to the fold can be the best option to manage this risk as it will enable individuals who are well conversant with the events of the project to carry on the best practices, regardless of the new dynamics in the implementation process.

Conclusion
Generally, the project is progressing well compared with other projects that we have done in the past in other places. Nonetheless, unexpected changes in the requirements of the system have prompted the project manager to contemplate implementing the change order in the implementation process to take care of the extra budget and time. The change process, however, risks running into trouble due to the unwillingness of various stakeholders in the project to be responsive to change. If the three issues are properly handled, the project will provide the expected deliverables at most a month after the originally scheduled time. Read More