Using Configuration Management to Mitigate the Impact of
Design and Construction Contract Changes
Michael Steinberg
PACO Group, Inc.
Abstract
Changes are and will continue to be an
inevitable part of the design and construction
of any project. Even the best design plans and
most detailed contract specifications are no
guarantee a particular project will not
experience numerous changes. This is
particularly true when the scope involves a
large-scale, multi-contract, multi-phased
complex project. Most projects, whether
public or private, domestic or international,
experience schedule slippage and cost
overruns
The application of a formalized
Configuration Management methodology
during the planning, design, construction,
maintenance, and operations phases of
complex projects can mitigate schedule
slippage and cost overruns. The decision to
apply Configuration Management to a
construction project can make the difference
between a successful project verses a failure;
turning a profit verses taking a loss; and a
satisfied client verses a disgruntled one.
The optimal adaptation of Configuration
Management entails the integration of a
specialized software solution. Using a
software driven process guarantees
repeatability, enforcement of standards, and
provides customized business rules governing
the steps required to track, manage, and
approve (or deny) change.
1. Origins of Configuration
Management
In the 1950s, Configuration Management
(CM) principles were first documented and
adopted by the United States Department of
Defense (DoD). The DoD focus on CM
started when concerns over life safety issues
were raised during the design and
Frank Otero
manufacturing of weapons and aircraft.
Subsequently, the nuclear industry adopted
CM to track equipment changes affecting
operational safety, and today CM is actively
used in many industries, including the
software development industry to manage
version control through tracking software
modifications. In 1995, CM was formalized
as an ISO 10007 quality management process
[1].
2. Definition of Configuration
Management
Over the years, numerous organizations
and industries developed various CM
definitions. The Project Management Institute
defines CM as a subsystem of the overall
project management information system [that]
includes the process for submitting proposed
changes, tracking systems for reviewing and
approving proposed changes, defining
approval levels for authorizing changes, and
providing a method to validate approved
changes. [2] The American National
Standards Institute, defines CM as A
management process for establishing and
maintaining consistency of a products
performance, functional, and physical
attributes with its requirements, design, and
operational information throughout its life. [3]
A common thread running between these
definitions is the consensus that CM is a
process accommodating change and
perpetually documenting how a system is
configured.
Due to the unique attributes of the
construction industry, the application of CM
assumes a slightly different meaning. In the
management of large multi-contract projects,
CM is applied to the design, construction,
maintenance, and operations phases to control
and document all changes to project baseline
drawings and specifications.
As construction projects grow larger and
more complex, the necessity for CM increases.
This concept is particularly true with todays
evolving project delivery approaches where
the owners contractual relationship and
involvement requires a reengineering of
project control strategies. The need for
accurate and readily attainable status, trending,
exception reporting, and other key
performance measures is crucial to project
success.
3. Defining and Recognizing Change
CM is the process of managing the
inevitable change occurring during every
phase of the project lifecycle. In this context,
change refers to any measurable deviation
from the project scope mutually agreed upon
by the contractor and client. The larger and
more complex the project, the greater the
likelihood and impact of change. Change, in
turn, is the primary reason for schedule
slippage and cost overruns.
To the untrained eye, budget overruns and
schedule slippage occurring during a project
often come as a surprise to the unsuspecting
project manager and client. CM practitioners,
however, are quick to point out that these
events are not unforeseeable at all. Non-
practitioners of CM simply lack the proper
tools to recognize and manage seemingly
trivial scope changes before they become
unmanageable and impact a projects schedule
and budget.
And it is not the changes that non-
practitioners of CM see so much as the affects
they have on a project. These individuals
spend a great deal of time analyzing a
projects history to unearth the cause of a
schedule slippage or budget overrun.
To the non-practitioner, seemingly trivial
changes often go unnoticed, or even worse, are
ignored because of their presumably
inconsequential nature. Unfortunately, these
types of changes are given their due
recognition only after having grown large
enough to negatively impact the project
schedule, budget, and client relations. By the
time an unsanctioned change is recognized and
dealt with, a project manager is often forced to
enter a reactive mode and perform damage
control.
If a formal CM system were in-place, the
causal chain of events permitting the non-
sanctioned change to grow and overwhelm a
project would have been documented,
reviewed, and curtailed before ever causing a
problem. So, it comes as no surprise that
projects performed without a formal CM
strategy are often the victims of change.
4. Embracing Change
Change, in and of itself, is not inherently
good or bad. The manner in which change is
managed can either result in a huge problem or
a great success story.
CM pundits embrace change as a means of
expanding project scope and business. Non-
practitioners of CM often see mid-project
scope changes as problems to be dealt with
rather than opportunities for growth.
Accommodating change in a graceful and
controlled manner can increase profit margins
and bolster client relations, while being ill-
prepared for change (or failing to recognize it)
can result in the perception of disorganization,
poor management, or even negligence.
5. Cost of Mismanaging Change
At first glance, the initial and recurring
expenses associated with selecting, purchasing,
implementing, and enforcing a formalized
CM system appear costly. However, these
expenses are trivial when compared to the
costs incurred from not using CM.
A case study performed by the Los
Angeles County Metropolitan Transit
Authority in 1990 compared the relative
construction costs of two similar railroad
segments in their $5.3 billion Rapid Transit
Program, one performed using CM principles
and one without. The study concluded the
railway segment constructed using CM
achieved a 60% reduction in administrative
costs, saving over $10 million; enabled
information request responses in minutes
rather than days; realized a 90% reduction in
contractor claims due to improved change
order processing times; and shifted the project
focus from data gathering to training, analysis,
and management [4].
6. Configuration Management
Methodology
CM can be expressed as four distinct core
areas: CM planning, document management,
baseline management, and change
management [5]. In practice each of these
areas is dependent upon (and linked to) the
remaining three.
Configuration Management Planning
CM planning involves determining what
needs to be controlled; when those controls
take effect; how changes are managed; and the
level of effort required to perform CM. This
information is documented in a CM Plan,
which contains the processes and procedures
describing how the configuration of the new
system is controlled [6]. The CM Plan is the
nucleus of effective CM enforcement,
containing the business rules governing
document management, baseline management,
and change management.
The CM Plan contains a workflow clearly
describing the roles, responsibilities, and
authority levels of all participating members
engaged on a project. Participating members
include all project staff, third-party consultants,
contractors, and client staff. This workflow
provides the foundation for all formal
communication and decisions made during a
project.
Strict adherence to the communication and
decision pipeline within a CM enforced
project eliminates the potential for
miscommunication, misrouted information,
and improper decision making. All
communications are shared with appropriate
senior members involved within the project,
resulting in complete visibility, accountability,
and tracking. All decisions flow through a
formal documented process of disclosure,
review, and acceptance by the contractor and
client. This decision process avoids ad-hoc
decision making (i.e. changes) impacting the
project schedule and budget.
Document Management
Under the principles of CM, all documents
generated within a project are closely managed,
tracked, and archived. This process includes
tracking and archiving all document changes,
versions, and approval communications. This
level of detail is necessary to avoid the
inclusion of ad-hoc document changes without
following a formal document approval process.
Managed documents include schedules,
diagrams, drawings, plans, specifications,
training material, manuals, requests for
information, change requests, and all written
daily project correspondences.
Baseline Management
Establishing and maintaining baseline
states for a project is a fundamental CM
precept. Baseline management involves the
capture and archive of the exact state of a
project during key points of the project
lifecycle. Document management plays a key
role in managing a projects baseline states.
Every version of every document is
archived, and the relationship between
documents is captured. This level of detail
permits the re-visitation of any phase of a
projects history for change validation,
auditing, and lessons learned purposes.
Effective baseline management provides
the contractor and client with a virtual paper
trail of all documents and written
communications from project conception
through close-out. This comprehensive
archive enables the contractor and client to
review all supporting documentation and
communications that existed at a particular
time. Each project baseline is a virtual
snapshot in time of every step of a projects
history.
Change Management
Change management is the process of
approving (or denying) changes impacting
project scope, schedule, and budget. CM
planning provides the rules governing change
management, while document management
and baseline management provide the detailed
project history substantiating change
management.
7. Implementing Configuration
Management
Due to the complexity and level of effort
required to perform CM on complex
construction projects, a software solution is
the only practical approach. A capable CM
solution must contain a minimal set of core
functionality to achieve effectiveness.
At the highest level, the CM system must
be configured with the clients business rules
(described in the CM Plan) for governing
intra-project communication, document
storage and retention, and change management.
Document management functionality must
contain the ability to store electronic and
scanned documents, and link those documents
to specific projects, personnel, schedules, and
other documents and correspondences.
A detailed search and retrieval function is
essential to view a project baseline from a
particular point in time. Viewing a time-
specific baseline involves extracting particular
archived versions of documents,
correspondences, schedules, budgetary items,
project staff, and links relating each of these
aforementioned items to each other. This level
of search and cross-linking is necessary to
perform audits either during a project and after
its completion.
Finally, user-level and group-level
permissions and robust security are essential
when multiple agencies, contractors, and
subcontractors require access to the CM
system.
8. Conclusion
When considering the benefits of
performing CM on a large or complex
construction project, the financial and business
implications of failing to perform CM are
immeasurable. The cost of implementing and
maintaining a CM solution will pay for itself
several times over during the course of any
project. Although formal CM
implementations in the construction industry
are currently uncommon, the industry needs to
look no further than other private and public
sectors successfully using and enjoying the
benefits of CM for decades.
Similar to the recent industry acceptance
and mandatory requirement for using risk
management in the construction industry, CM
has the potential for being adopted as the next
industry-wide standard.
9. References
[1] International Organization for
Standardization, ISO:10007:2003, Quality
management systems Guidelines for
configuration management, 2003.
[2] Project Management Institute, A Guide to
the Project Management Body of Knowledge,
Third Edition (PMBOK Guide), p. 90, 2004.
[3] ANSI/EDI 649-1998, National Consensus
Standard for Configuration Management,
1998.
[4] Los Angeles Metropolitan Transit
Authority, Rapid Transit Program, Intra-
Agency Study, 1990.
[5] PACO Technologies, Inc., ccsNet
Configuration Management Methodology,
2004.
[6] Mitretek Systems, Inc., Intelligent
Transportation Systems Joint Program Office,
United States Department of Transportation,
A Guide to Management for Intelligent
Transportation Systems, p. 5, 2002.