How do you handle a situation where the client thinks a new change is related to the current scope and wants you to make the change within the current budget, but you are not 100% sure yet if the change is directly related, but potentially indirectly related.
Scope is about making a test available offline with notifications.
The current test that is being modified is utilizing browser notification.
It was determined that some browsers have a "disable pop-up" setting that appears for the user.
Customer wants this pop-up to be modified so the user cannot disable future pop-ups, thus, not receive important notifications.
They want this change to be made under the same WO with no change in cost. But, the scope and cost only covers making the test available offline and using the current notification options, not creating new types of pop-ups.
To me, changing how the pop-ups look is a different task than making the test available offline. They are related in that the current pop-up could affect the test but they are separate tasks. Saving Changes...
In the end it is a commercial decision about what it's worth to you and to the client. The assumption (written or unwritten) when you attempt to fix scope is that you will have to negotiate at some point. If what you have described is the biggest thing you have to negotiate then you are in an extremely fortunate position.
My instinct would be to do it and write it down to goodwill that can be called upon later. On the other hand I wouldn't want to be in the position of fixing such detailed scope in the first place. It tends to be more trouble than it's worth because too often both parties can come out feeling like the loser. Saving Changes...
Przemyslaw NierodaSenior Systems Architect| Transition Technologies Managed ServicesWarsaw, Poland
Hi,
In my opinion many solutions could be applied. More information is needed to clearly understand the situation (hard to judge root cause of problem based on information provided) and the project.
Looks like misunderstanding on the requirement...
Some possible solutions (definitely there could be better ones):
1. Discussion with customer - asking why they think a new change is related to the current scope? Maybe both customer and solution provider misunderstood the requirement or the scope definition was not so clear in connection with requriement?
2. If there is a planned risk based on "browser pop-up problems" - This is the time to use the reserves or backup plan.
3. Might be a design fault (assuming good reliability of browser pop-ups to support required notification) - then solution provider should rework the solution and pay for a design bug (unknown risk - use the reserves).
With kind regards,
Przemyslaw Nieroda Saving Changes...
If the pop-up deactivation wasn't specified in project charter or define scope documents, it is a change that involves time and cost modifications. You must determine these variations, consulting with the technical team, that can inform you if the introduction of the code to disable the pop-ups takes efforts of investigation, for diverse types of browsers, or if the code can be introduced directly on the codification of the offline test. With the information provided by the technical team, costs and time additions can be calculated exactly and then you must start a change control process that must be approved by the project sponsor, project manager and management, depending on the structure of your organization.
...
1 reply by Susan Marangos
Mar 10, 2020 2:07 PM
Susan Marangos
...
Unless this is an Agile project that allows flexiblity for changes I think there'd have to be a change request here to properly document.
Regarding cost, it might be possible to save money in some other place to not an incur an additional cost but I'd need more info on the project to see if that's possible.
Saving Changes...
Drew CraigSr. Agile & Product Coach| VanguardPhiladelphia, Pa, United States
If the scope of work is clearly documented in Charter, Scope, SOW, etc., the additional work is also a clear change order. Sure, from customer perspective, will try to sell the cause, but all know not is part of original contract. As Veronica states, ascertain solution and related effort and write up the CO accordingly. I'd also recommend including the account manager.
Good luck. Saving Changes...
This is the constant challenge with requirements expectation gaps. While there certainly are customers who will try to get something extra for nothing, in most of the cases I've encountered it is a difference in opinion about the nature of a specific requirement.
If it is clearly outside the requirements baseline, you'd follow project change control procedures, but whether you charge the customer for it or not depends (in the real world) on a number of factors such as the need to keep this customer happy, the amount of profit your company will make of this project and so on.
Kiron Saving Changes...
Thomas WalentaGlobal Project Economy ExpertHackenheim, Germany
It is a change of your solution, as you have to implement functionality that was not requested before by the client or assumed to be necessary by yourself. So you should log a change request and analyze impact on other areas like schedule, cost, quality, risk etc. and communicate this with the customer. The analysis might include alternatives (e.g. clearly document for users to not disable popups).
If you have contingency reserve for such risks (gap between stated/agreed requirements and solution design), you may use it, in consent with the customer. If you have many of these changes, your reserve may run out. You may need to monitor the reserves and renegotiate with the client to increase it. It is often that when you document a requirement that it will be detailed further down the line and new solution components are necessary (sometimes called grade of a solution).
Better would have been to agree upfront how to deal with such situations, for example the new requirement may be shifted to another release. Saving Changes...
There are many reasons why we don't charge the client for a change. Regardless of the reason, make sure that you clearly show the cost to the client, with the offset to your company.
For example:
Cost of Change Request $ 1234
Supplier Goodwill -$ 1234
Total $ 0
I've used this approach also when splitting the cost between multiple stakeholders.
Of course, you should only agree to absorb a change if your profit margin can tolerate it. Saving Changes...
If the pop-up deactivation wasn't specified in project charter or define scope documents, it is a change that involves time and cost modifications. You must determine these variations, consulting with the technical team, that can inform you if the introduction of the code to disable the pop-ups takes efforts of investigation, for diverse types of browsers, or if the code can be introduced directly on the codification of the offline test. With the information provided by the technical team, costs and time additions can be calculated exactly and then you must start a change control process that must be approved by the project sponsor, project manager and management, depending on the structure of your organization.
Unless this is an Agile project that allows flexiblity for changes I think there'd have to be a change request here to properly document.
Regarding cost, it might be possible to save money in some other place to not an incur an additional cost but I'd need more info on the project to see if that's possible. Saving Changes...
