# Change Request

> One page. The temptation is to expand this form until it deters requests — which works, and
> produces undocumented changes rather than fewer changes.

**Change ref:** CR-____  **Date raised:** _______  **Raised by:** _______________
**Project:** _______________

## What is requested

**Change:** _______________

**Why, and why now:** _______________

**Urgency:** routine / next release / urgent — justification: _______________

**Is this a change or a defect?** change / defect against requirement ____ / clarification

> A defect against an agreed requirement is not a change. A requirement that was never specified
> is a change. Reclassifying missed requirements as defects to dodge this conversation destroys
> trust — and so does the reverse.

## Impact assessment

Not assessed by the person requesting it.

| | |
|---|---|
| Development effort | |
| **Retesting required** | |
| Documentation and requirement updates | |
| Regression risk | |
| **Schedule impact** | |
| Cost impact | |
| Risks introduced | |
| Assessed by | |

**What this displaces:** _______________

🔴 The displacement line is what makes the decision real. On a fixed-capacity project every
addition is a substitution — naming what will not happen converts an abstract approval into a
trade-off, and it changes decisions.

**If effort is genuinely unknown:** say so and offer to assess properly. A number invented in a
meeting becomes a commitment by the end of it.

## Decision

| | |
|---|---|
| Decision | approve / reject / defer until ___ |
| Decided by | |
| Date | |
| Rationale | |

## After approval — update these

- [ ] Requirements ([BRD](/pmo/brd/) / [FRD](/pmo/frd/) / [SRS](/pmo/srs/))
- [ ] [Traceability matrix](/pmo/rtm/)
- [ ] Test scope and [UAT](/pmo/uat/) criteria
- [ ] Plan and budget
- [ ] [Risk register](/pmo/risk-register/)
- [ ] Stakeholders informed

A change approved but not reflected in the artefacts is how documents and reality diverge.

---

## Delegated Authority

Set thresholds so small changes clear in a day. A process that takes three weeks to approve a
two-hour change will be bypassed — and the bypassing will not be visible.

| Size | Decided by | Target turnaround |
|---|---|---|
| No cost or schedule impact, within scope | Project manager | Same day |
| Absorbed within contingency | PM, sponsor informed | 1–2 days |
| Material cost, schedule or scope impact | Sponsor | Weekly cycle |
| Beyond the charter boundary | Steering group | Scheduled |

**Emergency path:** who may approve ___________, evidence required ___________, documented within
___ hours afterwards.

---

## Change Register

| Ref | Summary | Raised | Decision | Schedule impact | Cost impact | Decided by |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CR-001 | | | | | | |

## Cumulative position — report at every review

| | |
|---|---|
| Changes raised | |
| Approved | |
| Rejected | |
| **Cumulative schedule impact** | |
| **Cumulative cost impact** | |
| What has been dropped to absorb them | |

🔴 This table is the one that matters and the one nobody volunteers. Fifteen individually
reasonable changes have added eleven weeks; each was assessed alone, so nobody said so. Sponsors
approve individually reasonable things and are generally grateful to see the aggregate.

**If nothing has ever been rejected**, the process is a recording mechanism rather than a control.