Change Control Report: PROJ6003, Blue Spider Project Analysis

This report provides a comprehensive analysis of change control within the context of the Blue Spider project, undertaken by Park Corporation. It addresses the need for changes, stemming from issues such as communication breakdowns, resource limitations, and technical specification discrepancies. The report examines the impacts of these changes on project scope, cost, duration, and quality, while also suggesting techniques for effective management. It outlines a five-step process for submitting change requests, including documentation, impact assessment, and implementation. Furthermore, the report discusses various options for addressing change requests and associated risks, such as scope creep and resistance to change. A change request form is provided, and the report concludes by emphasizing the importance of effective change management in achieving project success, referencing key literature on project management principles. The assignment is available on Desklib, a platform that offers past papers and solved assignments for students.

Running head: CHANGE CONTROL
CHANGE CONTROL
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note:

1CHANGE CONTROL
Table of Contents
Introduction..........................................................................................................................2
Required changes.................................................................................................................2
Impact on project and techniques to manage.......................................................................3
Process to submit change request........................................................................................4
Option for change request and risk......................................................................................5
Change request form............................................................................................................6
Conclusion...........................................................................................................................9
References..........................................................................................................................10

2CHANGE CONTROL
Introduction
The following report deals with blue spider project which has been handled by Park
Corporation. The organization is involved in various R&D business carrying out a project for
department of defense (Abdi, Taghipour & Khamooshi, 2018). Park Corporation has completely
change its focus from R&D to production of facilities at low-cost. This recession has ultimately
resulted in sacking huge number of employees. In the year 1978, Park Corporation made a bid
regarding the very first phase of blue spider project. Lord industries stand out to be prime
contractor of Army Spartan program (Kivilä, Martinsuo & Vuorinen, 2017). The project is all
about improving the structural capabilities and life of Spartan Missiles.
The report deals with various kind of changes required on blue spider project. The next
part deals with impact of changes needed on different aspect like scope, time, quality, and cost.
Along with this, a list of techniques has been suggested in order to manage it. A suitable process
has been discussed for submitting the change request. Various option has been considered to
satisfy the change request.
Required changes
Success of this blue spider project is completely based on Anderson availability and
willingness of manager to cooperate. It was reported that personal working on their functional
manager who come up objectives did not completely coincide with the objective of project
manager (Dawood, Siddle & Dawood, 2019). There was minimum to no understanding
regarding the different functional areas of project, which ultimately resulted in communication
issues among team members and project manager.

3CHANGE CONTROL
The team members reacted quickly that completely hampered as a result of poor
communication and priority lack over different facilities. Cost control on this project can be
better as a result of the flexibility of personnel, but this stands out to less effective as a lack of
direct cost control (Perrotta et al. 2017). Many times Anderson found himself in a position where
he was unable to understand the demand.
Functional manager come up with limited resources at dispossing and juggle the
resources for satisfy the demand for most cases (Aguilar et al. 2016). Blue spider project has
certain number of changes which completely affected both agreement and complete commitment
of different resources. This stand out to be vital implication for the functional manager.
Gary come up team from various section of organization in order to support this blue
spider project. Technical specification highlighted the point that all the components of this
project should operate normal in between a temperate of 650F and 1450 F. The present testing
highlighted that this design will not function above 1300 F (Anushree, Velugula & Prasad,
2017). There was huge R&D effort given on next three upcoming weeks. Gary put his concern
regarding some specific requirement like changes in material and adding new material for
project.
Impact on project and techniques to manage
The main reason behind the project failure is either unrealistic planning or lack of
planning. Scope of the project is completely related to two major components that are time and
cost (Blaich & Wise, 2018). It is very much vital to check both requirements and project scope
with different stakeholders.

4CHANGE CONTROL
Scope: Impact on the change order regarding the order request of project scope. Project
plan stand out to be deliverable with the scope of project.
Cost: An estimation has been done regarding impact of cost change request with respect
to materials, equipment, and supplies regarding this blue spider project.
Duration: Project software in order to model the effect of change request will result in
direct impact on change request (Varajão, Colomo-Palacios & Silva, 2017). In addition, it will
have direct effect on duration of affected tasks for this blue spider project.
Quality: An analysis is done regarding change request affecting quality or specification
of project deliverables of blue spider project.
One of the essential tool is work breakdown structure, which helps in communicating
with different stakeholders. There is requirement of meeting in order to establish verification of
requirements for explaining procedure. During the planning process, there is need for meeting
with change control board who is completely responsible for approval or leaving pending request
(Kerzner, 2017). Project planning can be documented and displayed through various ways and
tools. It is always difficult for project manager and team members. Some of the latest
technologies and PM2.0 provides data collection where device can work in real time. It merely
focus on the task of updating complete information and re-planning of project.
Process to submit change request
There are mainly five steps required in submitting change request to tackle necessary
changes in Blue Spider Project like
Sufficient Documentation of request for change: In order to have change request, it is
very much important to collect all the required information. The next step will be estimation or

5CHANGE CONTROL
complete assessment that might not be accurate. Customer of blue spider project that both cost
and expected time does not exceed (Corvello, Javernick-Will & Ratta, 2017). It is very much
important to give customer complete form in order to collect the essential information.
Evaluating effort for change: This particular step is very much important for the
management. The analysis will help in complete planning of project, which comprises of change
request (Papke-Shields & Boyer-Wright, 2017). It merely comprises of certain factors that can
influence the beginning of production for changes in blue spider project.
Identify and analyze impact of change: Impact needs to be analyzed prior to
implementing change. It also clearly challenges both risk and impact of change request, which
will ultimately result in either project failure or success.
Implementing change request in structured way: There are list of challenges associated
with implementing change request at approval stage (Madhuri, Suma & Mokashi, 2018). Being
the change manager, change management will have necessary communication for informing and
educating people.
Providing Post-Implementing monitoring: This particular process is carried out after
beginning of production for complete testing and verification of change (Bhavsar, Shah &
Gopalan, 2019). It is very much important to identify lesson learned and benefits received from
future implementation.
Option for change request and risk
There are huge number of option for each change request like
 Analyzing scope change
 Incorporating change

6CHANGE CONTROL
 Approval or rejection for change
 Implementing change request.
The risk related to following option has been discussed below like
Unwillingness for any kind of change: Change resistance stand out to be one of the
biggest reason for change request failure (Corvello, Javernick-Will & Ratta, 2017). Team
members of this project completely fear for any changes in the project. There are list of ways in
which this change can be stopped like commitment of management.
Scoop Creep: In this blue spider project, scope change stand out to be a big risk. It is a
huge threat to the whole process of change management (Papke-Shields & Boyer-Wright, 2017).
In order to tackle the scope creep, all the required in this project scope needs to be monitored.
Change request form
Change Request
Project: Blue Spider Project Date: 20/03/2020
Change Requestor: Change No:
Change Category :
 Schedule Cost  Scope 
Requirements/Deliverables
 Testing/Quality □ Resources

7CHANGE CONTROL
Does this Change Affect (Check all that apply):
□ Corrective Action □ Preventative Action Defect Repair
 Updates
□ Other
Change Requested:
The following change request form is for change in materials of project. The project is unable
to meet its technical requirements. In order to meet the technical requirements, changes were
required in design material.
Reason for Change:
The blue spider project is unable to meet its technical requirements. The components
were not operating properly when the temperature is raised above 1300 F.
Alternatives Considered:
No, other alternatives is there for the project. There is need for changes in material of
the project.
Technical Changes:
The components are unable to work above the temperature of 1300F. So there is need
for changes in material quality

8CHANGE CONTROL
Risk
There are mainly two risk involved in this project
 Scope
 Unaccepting change.
Quality Implications :
Good material quality will ultimately help in meeting the basic requirements of blue
spider project.
Disposition:
Approve □ Reject □ Defer
Justification of Approval, Rejection, or Deferral:
The project lacks standard quality material which result in failure to meet basic
requirement.
Change Board Approval:
Name Signature Date

9CHANGE CONTROL
Conclusion
Above pages help us in reaching point that this report is all about identification of change
request on blue spider project. A proper change request form has been provided for this blue
spider project. The complete process has been discussed in providing a request in order to tackle
with identified changes. Various options along with risk has been discussed with respect to
change request. Personal working on this project focus on project manager who has objective did
not coincide with objective of Anderson. The ability of the team members to react quickly was
completely damaged as a result of poor communication and lack of priority control. Good cost
control on this project can be much better as a result of flexibility of loading personal. It stand
out to be much less effective as a lack of direct control.

10CHANGE CONTROL
References
Abdi, A., Taghipour, S., & Khamooshi, H. (2018). A model to control environmental
performance of project execution process based on greenhouse gas emissions using
earned value management. International Journal of Project Management, 36(3), 397-
413.
Aguilar, J. A., Tripp, C., Zaldivar, A., Garcia, O., & Zurita, C. E. (2016). Evaluating a
requirements change request in a goal-oriented requirements engineering model. IEEE
Latin America Transactions, 14(5), 2411-2417.
Anushree, J. V., Velugula, N., & Prasad, K. N. P. (2017). Design of an ERP Software that
Facilitates Easy Flow of a Process Change Order (PCO) Request in an
Enterprise. International Journal of Engineering Science, 12771.
Bhavsar, K., Shah, V., & Gopalan, S. (2019). Business Process Reengineering: A Scope of
Automation in Software Project Management Using Artificial Intelligence. International
Journal of Engineering and Advanced Technology (IJEAT), 9(2).
Blaich, C., & Wise, K. (2018). Scope, Cost, or Speed: Choose Two—The Iron Triangle of
Assessment. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 50(3-4), 73-77.
Corvello, V., Javernick-Will, A., & Ratta, A. M. L. (2017). Routine project scope management
in small construction enterprises. International Journal of Project Organisation and
Management, 9(1), 18-30.
Dawood, H., Siddle, J., & Dawood, N. (2019). Integrating IFC and NLP for automating change
request validations. Journal of Information Technology in Construction, 24, 540-552.

11CHANGE CONTROL
Kerzner, H. (2017). Project management: a systems approach to planning, scheduling, and
controlling. John Wiley & Sons.
Kivilä, J., Martinsuo, M., & Vuorinen, L. (2017). Sustainable project management through
project control in infrastructure projects. International Journal of Project
Management, 35(6), 1167-1183.
Madhuri, K. L., Suma, V., & Mokashi, U. M. (2018). A triangular perception of scope creep
influencing the project success. International Journal of Business Information
Systems, 27(1), 69-85.
Papke-Shields, K. E., & Boyer-Wright, K. M. (2017). Strategic planning characteristics applied
to project management. International Journal of Project Management, 35(2), 169-179.
Perrotta, D., Faria, J., Araájo, M., Tereso, A., & Fernandes, G. (2017, December). Project change
request: A proposal for managing change in industrialization projects. In 2017 IEEE
International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management
(IEEM) (pp. 1525-1529). IEEE.
Varajão, J., Colomo-Palacios, R., & Silva, H. (2017). ISO 21500: 2012 and PMBoK 5 processes
in information systems project management. Computer Standards & Interfaces, 50, 216-
222.