Make changes with authority

What you will understand

• Explain capture, assess, recommend, decide and implement for issues.
• Distinguish delegated change authority from available budget.
• Recognise when an issue requires escalation or baseline updates.

The idea

Fast decisions are useful when the right person has enough information and authority to make them. They become costly when work starts before anyone understands the consequences. Controlled issue resolution gives the project a proportionate route from a raised matter to a recorded decision and, where authorised, an implemented change. It is a way to enable useful adaptation.

Capture the issue so the situation and its source are understood. Assess its nature, urgency, significance and impact. Consider benefits, cost, time, quality, scope, risk and sustainability as relevant, including the business case and any commercial implications. The issue register supports tracking; a significant issue may need a separate issue report with analysis and options. Recording an issue is not the same as committing to the solution suggested by its author.

Recommend a proportionate response based on the assessment. Options can include taking corrective action, approving a proposed baseline change, rejecting a request, deferring a decision for a stated reason or accepting an off-specification through an authorised concession where permitted. The recommendation should explain consequences and residual concerns. Cheap implementation does not necessarily mean small impact: a low-cost change can invalidate a benefit, a safety obligation or another supplier’s agreed work.

The project board may delegate change decisions within defined limits to an appropriate change authority, which can include the project manager or other suitable people. Authority must be explicit about its scope and conditions. A person’s seniority or technical expertise alone does not confer unlimited permission to alter approved baselines. If a decision lies outside delegated authority, escalate it with useful analysis rather than implement first and seek retrospective approval.

A change budget is money set aside to fund approved changes. It is distinct from a risk budget and from an unrestricted spending allowance. Having sufficient funds does not confer authority to approve a change. Conversely, an authorised decision needs a realistic account of how it will be funded and delivered. Project tolerances, delegated change limits and contractual authority can overlap, so check all relevant boundaries rather than assume one permission overrides the others.

After the authorised decision, communicate the outcome, update the relevant records and baselines, and implement and verify the agreed action. Keep a traceable history of what changed and why. If assessment forecasts a tolerance breach, follow exception escalation arrangements; an issue report is not a substitute for an exception report where one is required. Close the issue when the agreed resolution is confirmed, not merely when someone promises to act. Lessons from repeated issues can improve later planning and delivery.

A request is not an approval

Points to remember

• Assess the effect of a proposed change across relevant performance aspects.
• Delegated change authority has conditions as well as possible financial limits.
• Implement and update baselines after the authorised decision, preserving the history.

Your takeaway

Capture, assess and recommend before the appropriate authority decides. Fund and implement approved actions, update affected baselines and verify resolution. Proportionate control allows adaptation while preserving accountability and reliable information.