Change Management in the Heat of Execution

By Brittany Stivers

Change is inevitable during the execution of capital projects. Despite the best planning efforts, no schedule remains untouched, no scope remains static, and no team moves through execution without encountering shifting priorities, emerging risks, or unforeseen constraints.

The challenge is not whether change will happen, but how it will be managed.

Most capital projects start with some form of change control protocol. But when field conditions intensify and pressure mounts, those processes often break down. Formal change requests get bypassed. Verbal instructions replace documented decisions. Scope adjustments are made in the name of progress, but without clear review or traceability.

Change management, once a structured discipline, becomes reactive and fragmented. And that’s when execution begins to lose control.

Why Change Management Breaks During Execution

At the start of a project, change control processes are clearly defined. There are forms, workflows, review boards, and gates. Everyone understands the protocol—until the real-world pressure of execution begins.

In the heat of fieldwork, priorities shift. A contractor runs into an obstruction. A delivery is delayed. A stakeholder demands scope modification. The natural impulse is to act fast, keep the work moving, and “sort it out later.”

Unfortunately, sorting it out later often means rework, conflicting documentation, schedule slippage, and cost disputes. By the time leadership realizes the impact, the project may have drifted far from its baseline, without any formal record of why.

The problem isn’t the change itself. It’s that execution teams stop managing it with discipline.

Speed and Structure Are Not Opposites

Many project teams abandon formal change management because they believe it’s too slow. When you’re facing a time-sensitive issue on-site, waiting for a weekly review board or multiple layers of sign-off feels unrealistic. Therefore, field supervisors often act independently—sometimes with the right intent, but without visibility into the broader implications.

That’s why effective change management during execution must be responsive, but not informal.

Projects that manage change effectively during execution have a structure in place that enables real-time decisions without compromising control. They define fast-track paths for low-impact changes, maintain impact templates for quick analysis, and empower the right individuals to approve, escalate, or defer as needed.

Execution doesn’t have to trade discipline for speed. But it does require that your change control system adapts to field realities.

The Hidden Cost of Unmanaged Change

Even small scope changes, when undocumented, can trigger significant disruption. Adjusting one work package may require new materials, shift labor allocation, create congestion, or interfere with inspections. Without a formal review, these knock-on effects aren’t accounted for until problems show up downstream.

Unmanaged change also corrodes accountability. Teams lose track of who approved what and when. Contractors feel exposed. Owner teams find themselves chasing paper trails that never existed. Eventually, confidence in both schedule and cost forecasts deteriorates.

And when changes accumulate without structure, they can overwhelm even the best-intentioned teams. What started as one field adjustment becomes a dozen informal scope shifts—none of which have been appropriately priced, sequenced, or resourced.

Embedding Change Control Into Daily Execution

During execution, change management must be integrated into the project’s rhythm—not treated as a separate activity.

This means:

• Linking change review into daily standups and shift briefings
• Assigning clear roles for logging, analyzing, and escalating changes
• Maintaining a live change log that tracks scope, cost, and schedule impacts in real time
• Ensuring all changes, even those initially handled in the field, are documented and rolled into project controls within 24 to 48 hours

Leadership must also reinforce the importance of discipline. That means modeling good behavior—insisting on traceability, asking for impact reviews, and refusing to accept undocumented changes as operational reality. The project culture must treat change not as a disruption, but as a regular part of execution that deserves structured attention.

Making Change Management a Strategic Lever

Handled well, change management during execution can improve performance. It helps clarify intent, maintain alignment, and protect contingency. It also offers valuable insights into project health.

The frequency, type, and source of changes provide a real-time window into how effectively planning, procurement, and field coordination are being executed. A spike in changes from a specific contractor, workfront, or system may signal deeper misalignment or planning gaps.

When tracked carefully, change logs become not just a record—they become a management tool.

TMG Helps Projects Maintain Change Discipline Under Pressure

At TMG, we specialize in helping capital project teams sustain control during execution. Change management is one of the most common—and most preventable—sources of drift we encounter.

Our execution support teams help reestablish control by embedding responsive, field-ready change protocols that ensure decisions are documented, impacts are tracked, and leadership stays informed.

We don’t slow teams down. We provide them with the structure to move faster without compromising clarity, accountability, or confidence.

If your project is experiencing more field adjustments, informal direction, or untracked changes, we can help restore discipline before those decisions start cascading into unplanned delays and overspending.