3. IBEN ENGENHARIA LTDA. ASAKEY-PRINCIPLEWESHALLDEFINETHAT; NO CHANGE SHALL BE INCORPORATED UNTIL IT IS 100% CONFIGURED. THISCONFIGURATIONSHALLGOOBLIGATORILYTHROUGHCERTAINPROCESSESTHATWEWILLSEESTEPBYSTEPNEXT.
4. IBEN ENGENHARIA LTDA. HOWEVER,REMEMBERTOINFORMEVERYBODYTHAT; NO CHANGE SHALL BE INCORPORATED UNTIL IT IS 100% CONFIGURED. AND HOW MUCH TIME DO WE HAVE TO CONFIGURE THEM? THE SPEED AND PRECISION OF THIS PROCESS VARY ACCORDING WITH THE MATURITY OF A PMO IN MANAGING CHANGES. THE REGISTRATION OF LESSONS LEARNED WITH THE MANAGEMENT OF THE KNOWLEDGE IS THE WAY TO INCREMENT THE ORGANIZATION’S MATURITY IN CHANGE MANAGEMENT.
6. IBEN ENGENHARIA LTDA.
DESCRIPTION OF THE CHANGE
The client, in a meeting held on 05/19/2011, requested the analysis of the replacement of the executive standard for concrete block brickwork, determined in the project for the main facade of the building called Capiche, to a system that presents versatility in the case of future expansion and at the same have a better appearance.
NEED FOR THE CHANGE
The change aims to incorporate the requirements presented by stakeholders not considered during the development phase of the project, with such requirements being: 1. removable facade; and 2; New aesthetic standards.
SOLUTION PROPOSED
Construtora Iben proposed 3 concepts that meet the requirements listed, being: 1) Glass+ Alucobond Set 2) Pre- molded concrete slabs for the Facade; 3) Masterboard painel system
CHANGEREQUEST
ACHANGEREQUESTFORMSLIPMUSTOBLIGATORILYCONTAINADETAILEDDESCRIPTIONFORTHECHANGE,THEREALNEEDOFTHECHANGEANDONEORMORESOLUTIONSPROPOSES.
7. IBEN ENGENHARIA LTDA.
ANALYSIS BY THE CHANGE COMMITTEE
CHANGE REQUEST
ANALYSISBYTHECHANGECOMMITTEE
THECHANGEREQUESTMUSTBEANALYZEDBYTHECHANGECOMMITTEE,AQUALIFIEDARMOFTHEPMO,CAPABLEOFCREATINGQUICKRESPONSESFORTHEIMPACTSASSOCIATEDWITHTHECHANGE.
9. IBEN ENGENHARIA LTDA. ANALYSISBYTHECHANGECOMMITTEE
IMPACT ANALYSIS
AREAS OF ANALYSIS OF THE CHANGE
ITEM
AREA
DESCRIPTION OF THE IMPACT
RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ANALYSIS
UPDATE THE PLAN?
.01
SCOPE
The brickwork quantitative shall be reduced, with the addition of the installing of the closing system adopted. Additionally, the performance characteristics of the foundation may be altered, depending on the choice. It is necessary to review the projects.
PLANNING MANAGER
YES
.02
COST
In all cases, the cost of the system is higher than the cost initially defined. The alternatives vary from R$ 250,00.00 to R$ 500,00.00, depending on the projects. If the work falls behind schedule, the costs associated with time shall be assessed.
PLANNING MANAGER
YES
.03
TIME
The activities begin with the analysis of alternatives and new requirements, development of the projects, budgeting, negotiation, adjudication of a contractual amendment instrument, replanning, contracting of fourth parties and beginning of the works.
MANAGER OF THE PROJECT
YES
.04
ACQUISITIONS
A new work package shall be incorporated to the purchase plan, to be budgeted with fourth parties, the terms of that proposal may cause an impact especially to the scope, quality, time and cost.
WORK MANAGER
YES
.05
PEOPLE
The Histogram should be reassessed and the labor mobilization plan should be adjusted to comply with the new profiles of collaborators assigned with developing the new scope.
WORK MANAGER
YES
.06
QUALITY
The flexibility and the aesthetic standard requirements shall be affected, and they shall be assessed by the designers for impact on lighting, thermal insulation, and acoustic insulation, protection of forklifts, user safety, maintenance, and cleaning
WORK MANAGER
NO
.07
RISK
The work would be initiated and the planning would be developed in successive waves, i.e., with the project already being implemented. Decisions taken during the activities listed under item 03, Time, shall create risks as they are solved.
WORK MANAGER
YES
.08
COMMUNICATION
It is suggested that a communication plan that determines the channels and levels of approval necessary for the proposed changes.
PROJECT DIRECTOR
YES
.09
INTEGRATION
All stakeholders and the project team shall be reintegrated in order to assess the impact on the objectives of the project.
PROJECT DIRECTOR
NO
10. IBEN ENGENHARIA LTDA.
APPROVAL
THEIMPACTSSHALLBEAPPROVEDINDIVIDUALLY,FULLY,ORWITHRESTRICTIONS,INORDERTODOCUMENTTHECONSENTWITHTHEDECISION.
THETASKOFAPPROVINGORREJECTCHANGESISUSUALLYASSIGNEDTOTHECLIENTAND/ORSPONSOR.
REJECTEDCHANGEREQUESTSSHALLBEDOCUMENTEDFORTHEMTONOTBEUNDULYINCORPORATEDORFORNEWREQUESTSOFTHESAMENATURETONOTBERE-INSERTEDINANALYSISANDAPPROVALPROCESS.
DECISION ON A CHANGE
1. ACCCEPTED 2. REJEICRED 3. ACCEPTED WITH RESTRICTIONS
AREA
NOTES
DECIS.
RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DECISION
.01
SCOPE
1
SPONSOR
.02
COST
1
SPONSOR
.03
TIME
1
SPONSOR
.04
ACQUISITIONS
1
SPONSOR
.05
PEOPLE
1
SPONSOR
.06
QUALITY
1
SPONSOR
.07
RISK
1
SPONSOR
.08
COMMUNICATION
1
SPONSOR
.09
INTEGRATION
1
SPONSOR
12. IBEN ENGENHARIA LTDA. CONFIGURATION(STORAGE, ACCESS, REGISTRATION AND IDENTIFICATION OF THE VERSIONS)
•APPROVAL
ANALYSIS BY THE CHANGE COMMITTEE
CHANGE REQUEST
CHANGECONFIGURATION
