web-based application for managing change orders in construction projects

Web-based application for managing changeorders in construction projectsC. Charoenngam, S. T. Coquinco and B. H. W. Hadikusumo School of Civil Engineering,Asian Institute of Technology, Pathumthani, Thailand

Abstract: A change order is an order from an employer authorizing a variation. Success inmanaging change orders results in uninterrupted construction operations and an agreed�nal project cost as well as duration. One of the methods to manage change orders is toestablish good communication and cooperation among project team members. Success ofthis method can be enhanced by developing and utilizing a web-based change ordermanagement system that supports documentation practice, communication and integrationbetween different team members in the change order work�ow. This paper discusses ourweb-based project management system, change order management system (COMS), tomanage change orders using the Internet. In order to show COMS’ potential bene� ts, a testcase was conducted for comparing the COMS with the conventional practice of changeorder management.

Key words: change orders; contract; documentation; Internet; variation; web-basedproject management

Introduction

The construction industry has a complex communication nature because a lot of parties areinvolved in the business process. An example of this complex nature is that multiple reportsmust be prepared to ensure that information is delivered to all organizations, departments orstaffs using it. This can be a problem if a channel and mechanism of communication is notadequately designed. This problem can be overcome by establishing an Internet-basedcommunications channel, which supports information transfer for all remote project teammembers is a timely and accurate means so that all teams can obtain the information suited totheir functions.

In the construction industry, a client often decides to issue a change order for authorizinga variation of work from the original scope of work. A study by Cox et al. (1999) found that inmonetary terms alone, the direct cost of post contract design changes amounts to 5.1 to 7.6% ofthe total project cost. In terms of project delays, change orders are considered to be one of themajor causes (Arditi et al., 1985; Ehrenreich-Hansen, 1994; Zafar, 1996; Al-Saggaf, 1998).

A change order is a complex information transfer that has to be managed carefully, otherwisedisputes between a client and a contractor related to cost and time of work might occur. A changeorder is complex because it involves all the construction teams, together with a voluminousamount of information that either has to be sent, checked, corrected, approved, requested,clari� ed, transmitted or submitted, among many other things. Owing to this complexity, a methodto manage change orders is proposed in this research by using Internet technology.

Address for correspondence: B.H.W. Hadikusumo, School of Civil Engineering, Asian Institute of Technology,PO Box 4, Klong Luang, Pathumthani 12120, Thailand, E-mail: [email protected]

Construction Innovation 2003; 3: 197–215

# Arnold 2003 10.1191=1471417503ci058oa

This paper � rst discusses web-based construction project management. Secondly, wediscuss change orders in the construction industry including the existing practice of changeorder process viewed from two different standard forms of contract: ICE 6th and FIDIC 4th.This discussion is used to analyse the system of our proposed method, COMS. Finally, themajor works of research to develop COMS are discussed: analysing and developing theCOMS system and testing the proposed method in order to know its potential advantages.

Web-based project management

Bridges (1997) identi� ed the potentials of Internet technology for managing constructionprojects, stating that this technology will change business methods in managing constructionprojects, for example, because data can be retrieved transparently from either a local disk or aremote website that provides a communication point for client, designer and contractor. Theutilization of this technology has been applied in some actual projects (Scoones, 1999;Wilkinson, 2000a,b) and academic researches (Deng et al., 2001).

Several commercial applications for managing change orders are available in the market.The applications vary from a PC-based software, such as Primavera ExpeditionTM, tobusiness-to-business (B2B) servers, such as CitadonTM; however, we have not identi� edany change order system that supports standard forms of contract, such as FIDIC and ICE,which are commonly accepted and used in construction projects; this is the � rst of ourresearch rationales.

The second rationale is to provide a framework for interested construction companies todevelop affordable web-based project management, particularly for the change order manage-ment system.

The change order in construction projects

Change orders can be de� ned as a change, alteration or addition with respect to the originalplans, speci� cations or other contract documents, as well as a change in cost, which follow thecreation of legal relationship between client and contractor (Choy and Sidwell, 1991; Wallace,1994; both cited in Chan and Yeong, 1995; and Hanna et al., 1998). Change order has severalcharacteristics: a) it is a written document containing authorization of the requested change,b) the change is brought about through no fault of the contractor, and c) the changed work isnot included in the original contract and therefore it is not included in the contract price.

According to its types, Cox (1997) identi� ed three kinds of change orders: 1) a formalchange order, which is an actual document called ‘change order’ issued by a client whichmodi� es the contract terms, plans or speci� cations; 2) a constructive change order, which isan extra contract work performed pursuant either to oral or implied owner directives, or as aresult for problems for which the owner is responsible; and 3) a cardinal change order, whichmay occur whenever there is a substantial amount of work required outside the scope of theoriginal contract. The latter is out of this research scope.

Formal change orders are those that originate from either the owner or owner’s representa-tive in the presence of the architect=engineer (A=E). It can be described as a directive issuedby the owner to conduct changes in the scope of work.

198 C. Charoenngam, S.T. Coquinco and B.H.W. Hadikusumo

The constructive change orders originate from either the contractor or subcontractor. Thecontractor � les a constructive change when the authorized representative gives or fails to givedirections that interfere with the normal contract development and has such an effect as if aformal change has been issued (Bu-Bshait and Manzanera, 1990).

Documentation and formal procedures for change ordersChan and Yeong (1995) stated that quality contract documentation, and good communicationand cooperation between building team members are two of several elements that can be usedto manage change orders. The � rst element, good documentation, can be facilitated throughthe design of an effective change order system. Jacob (1978: 64–65) noted that ‘lax attitudesand unfamiliarity with proper change order procedures have led to serious � nancial loss andinsolvency’. A realization of the construction participants of the importance of documentationpractice is one of the � rst components in the development of a change order system. Theeffective change order system can be designed by understanding the change orders process orwork� ow, which can be compiled from the standard forms of contract. The second element,good communication, can be facilitated through providing information in a timely mechanism.This can be achieved by using Internet technology as the communication media, because theinformation can be accessed in a timely and accurate manner and may be accessed fromdifferent locations. These two elements are used in this research to develop COMS.

The change order process: ICE 6th and FIDIC 4thIn this research, two standard forms of contract, ICE and FIDIC, are studied in order toidentify the practice of the change order process. The reason for choosing these two standardforms is that they are well accepted.

ICE contract conditionsThe conditions of this contract cover several aspects related to change orders: orderedvariations, valuation of ordered variations, engineer to � x rates, and notice of claims.

Ordered variations. The ICE conditions of contract refer to change orders as orderedvariations. It is stated that it is the Engineer who can order variations, which should be inwriting, but can also be in oral form. For the case of oral instructions it was stated that suchinstruction should be con� rmed in writing as soon as possible. If such writing is not carriedout by the Engineer, the Contractor can make a written account of the said oral instructionand, if not contradicted by the Engineer, shall be considered as an instruction in writing.

According to the ICE conditions of contract, the variations may include, ‘additions,omissions, substitutions, alterations, changes in quality, form, character, kind, position,dimension, level or line and changes in any speci� ed sequence or method or timing ofconstruction required by the contract’. Figure 1 is a graphical representation of a possiblescenario for the conduction of a variation order.

Valuation of ordered variations. When the variation is of similar character and executedunder similar conditions, the works shall be valued according to the rates and values found inthe BOQ (bill of quantities). When the works to be varied is not similar, the BOQ shall beused as a basis for valuation.

Web-based application for managing change orders 199

Engineer to � x rates. On occasions of any work with related variations, in which theEngineer or the Contractor � nds the rate or price for such varied work on the contract asunreasonable or inapplicable, the following are carried out:

° The Engineer gives to the Contractor or the Contractor to the Engineer a notice regardingthe inapplicability of the price. This is done before the commencement of the varied workor soon thereafter as applicable.

° In circumstances in which the rate or price is to be varied, the Engineer shall � x such rateor price as in the circumstances the Engineer shall think reasonable and proper.

Notice of claims. A notice of claims procedure is conducted when the Contractor intends toclaim a higher rate or price than that stipulated by the Engineer. Its � ow can be stated asprocedures for sending the notice of claims and procedures for the submission of interimaccounts and updates (Figure 2). Sending the notice of claims must be conducted followingseveral conditions: 1) the Contractor is to send a noti� cation of intent to claim within 28 daysof the happening of such an event that provoked the intention to � le the claim; 2) the intentionto � le must be done in writing; and 3) the Contractor must keep contemporary records as maybe necessary to substantiate the Contractor’s claim. In addition, the procedures for submittingthe interim accounts and updates are as follows a) The Contractor must send the � rst interimaccount, after noti� cation of claim. The � rst account must give full details of the amountclaimed to date and the grounds of the claim. b) After this, the Engineer reserves the right to

Figure 1. Ordered variation process


ask the Contractor to send to the Engineer up-to-date accounts of the claim, giving theaccumulated amount for the claim and additional grounds for which the claim is based.

FIDIC 4th contract conditionsSome parts of the FIIDIC, Part I of the conditions of contract, have similar forms and contentsas the ICE conditions of contract. However, some details of the FDIC are different from ICE.The process of change orders of FIDIC is similar to that of the ICE (Figure 1). The followingis a summary of some relevant aspects found in the FIDIC conditions of contract.

Variations. The FIDIC conditions of contract refer to change orders as variations. Similar toICE, the Engineer is given the right to order variations to the Contractor. The Engineer’sauthority consists of instructing the Contractor to do the following:

° increase or decrease the quantity of work included in the contract;° omit such work except when the work is to be carried out by the Employer or another

contractor;° change the character or quality or the kind of any such work;° change the levels, lines, positions and dimensions of any part of the works;° execute additional work of any kind necessary for the completion of the works;° change any speci� ed sequence or timing of the construction of any part of the works.

Figure 2. Notice of claims and interim accounts and updates of ICE and FIDIC


Valuation of variations. FIDIC’s clause for variation is similar to that of ICE.

Power of the Engineer to � x rates. On instances where the varied works cannot be valuedappropriately by the existing rates and prices on the contract, the Engineer, in consultationwith the Employer and Contractor, shall determine a suitable rate or price, which should beagreed upon by the Engineer and Contractor. In case of disagreements the Engineer shall � xsuch rates or prices as in his opinion is appropriate and shall notify the Contractoraccordingly, with a copy to the Employer.

FIDIC, in contrast to ICE, adds a provision in terms of time for noti� cation for theEngineer or the Contractor in cases where they may wish to change a rate or price. A noticemust be given within 14 days of the date of instruction (change order) by:

° the Contractor to the Engineer of the Contractor’s intention to claim extra payment or avaried rate or price;

° the Engineer to the Contractor of the Engineer’s intention to vary a rate or price.

Procedure for claims. There are three important elements in the claims procedure:

° Notice of claims. The Contractor is to give notice of his intention to claim to the Engineer,plus a copy to the Employer, within 28 days of the point when the event giving rise to theclaim has � rst arisen.

° Contemporary records. The Contractor is to keep records in order to support the claim hewishes to make.

° Substantiation of claims. After 28 days of giving the notice, the Contractor is to give theEngineer an account giving detailed particulars of the amount claimed and the grounds forwhich the claim is based. When the event is continuous, the Contractor is to give interimaccounts giving accumulated amounts and any further grounds upon which the claim isbased.

Figure 2 shows graphically the process for � lling notice of claims and sending interimaccounts. It must be noted that the difference in FIDIC’s process is that it did not specifythat the notice should be in writing, unlike that of ICE. In FIDIC, the Contractor is to senda � nal account to the Engineer upon occurrence of the end of the effects resulting fromthe event giving rise to the claim. The FIDIC states the process for submitting the � nalaccount.

Web-based change order management system (COMS)

There are three major steps in developing an application: system analysis, design andimplementation. System analysis studies the need to develop the application by identifyingits requirements. The system design stage studies how to represent the system analysed in thecomputer format; and system implementation covers the programming part in order totransfer the system analysis and design into a computer application software. The approachesused to analyse the system are a) to understand the business objectives, and b) to model thesystem. The system analysis part is discussed in detail in the third section, but the other twostages are not presented in detail in this article. However, the results of the system design,


which are the business objects and its data requirements, are represented in Appendix A.System implementation is presented brie� y in Section 3 in order to provide a better idea of theCOMS developed.

Business objectivesThe � rst step to develop COMS is to analyse the system requirements. The results of thisanalysis form the four main objectives of COMS:

1. Aid for change order transaction° Facilitation of the timeliness of related change order documents submission. Reference

is given to the clause in ICE and FIDIC regarding the days given to submit change orderclaims and interim reports.

° The system should act as a tool to facilitate better communication between theconstruction participants.

° The system should act as a proactive tool for the prevention of costly disputes. This isthe core premise for the RFI (request for information) subsystem.

° Reduction of cost in business processing compared to the previous paper-based system.Reduction in cost can be achieved in terms of avoidance of delays and potential disputesto mismanaged change orders.

2. Offer data storage and structure° The system should aid proper structured documentation providing an integrated data

source.° The system should be able to � le change order requests and change orders and all

related attachments to each change order systematically, such that access to suchdocuments can be facilitated.

3. Aid for change order form making° The system should be able to set the process to follow in change orders, thereby giving

the process set procedures, and hence control and uniformity. This is done in theassumption that the � eld personnel are not equipped with ample knowledge in changeorder management.

4. Practicality of application° A generic ability of the system prototype to be reused for different projects.

Another result of this analysis is the context diagram presented in Figure 3. The contextdiagram de� nes the scope and boundaries of the system. This diagram is accompanied withsystem rules which govern the roles of project teams as follows:

1. Owner° Can correspond only through the architect=engineer. Uses correspondence to ask for

any intended change of works.° The major function of the owner is to decide whether a change order request and its

attached work evaluation will be approved, returned for renegotiation or rejected. Itmust be noted that a change order request, before it is brought up to the owner for � nalapproval must be evaluated � rst by the architect=engineer for its merits and costproposal made by the contractor.


° The owner will always receive copies of correspondence, request for information,change order request, change order: cost proposal, change order for approval andinterim reports made by the contractor sent to the architect=engineer.

2. Architect=Engineer° Corresponds directly to the contractor and on occasion to the owner.° Between the owner and the architect=engineer, the latter reserves the right to issue

formal change order requests and approved change orders. The architect=engineerfunctions as the direct representatives of the owner to the contractor.

° Receives correspondence from owner and contractor.° Evaluates change order cost proposals (change order for approval).° Can ask for cost and schedule interim reports.

3. Contractor° Corresponds directly with the architect=engineer but sends copies to owner’s account.° Acts as the representative for the subcontractor. Receives and sends correspondence

from subcontractors regarding clari� cations on work items or for facilitation ofsubcontractor initiated change of work request.

° Reserves the right to send change order request, change order cost proposals andinterim reports.

° Receives approved change order with notice to proceed and change order requestssubject to work valuation from the architect=engineer.

4. Subcontractor° For items of work that require valuation, the subcontractor corresponds the values to the

contractor. In this system, only the contractor can send a formal work valuationdocument in the form of the change order: the cost proposal.

° If the subcontractor in doing his works � nds a need to bring about a change orderrequest, he shall do so through the contractor by sending a correspondence.

5. Supplier (not included in this study)° Supplier information can be added to the system in order to cost the changed work in

terms of added materials and equipment.

Figure 3. Change order management system context diagram


Object-oriented modelingIn this study, object-oriented methodology is used to conduct a detailed study of systemanalysis. A speci� c method, ‘use cases’, is used. This method can be used to identify objects,attributes, behaviour and relationships between objects in the systems.

Object-oriented modeling in this method involves three main stages: 1) � nding ‘actors’ and‘use cases’ based on the system’s context diagram, 2) constructing the ‘Use Cases’ model,and 3) identifying business objects and its de� nitions.

Finding ‘actors’ and ‘use cases’ based on the context diagram . The ‘actors’ and ‘use cases’found are listed in Table 1.

Modeling the ‘use case’. By using the previous analysis, the ‘use case’ of COMS canbe modeled (Figure 4). The model consists of three subsystems: 1) the change orderfacilitation management subsystem, 2) the request for information subsystem, and 3) thedocumentation management subsystem.

Change order facilitation management subsystem. This subsystem enables the participantsto make change order requests, correspondence and clari� cations, and change order coupleswith notice to proceed. There are two scenarios applied in this subsystem: formal changeorder and constructive change order. In the � rst scenario, the owner makes a change orderrequest document. The contractor is then asked to produce a valuation in terms of cost andschedule with regard to the change works. The contractor either makes a valuation or if thechanged work is subcontracted, asks the subcontractor to make the valuation. The contractormay also opt to send a correspondence for clari� cation if the valuation is vague. Afterclari� cation, the contractor then sends the valuation of the change works as a change ordercost proposal, which is subject to owner approval. The A=E checks the change order costproposal and performs one of two functions: 1) The A=E may send a correspondence toclarify items on the cost proposal, or 2) if the A=E is satis� ed, the A=E may recommend theproposal to the owner for approval and eventual signing. The A=E then facilitates the sendingof the approved change order to the contractor coupled with a notice to proceed document.

Table 1 Listings of actors and use cases for the COMS

Actor Use case

Owner Initiates Sends correspondence (limit to A=E account only)Initiates Sends approved change order to the contractor

Architect=engineer (A=E) Initiates Sends correspondence (to owner, contractor)Initiates Submits change order requestInitiates Sends change order (assessed by A=E to the owner for approval)

Contractor Initiates Sends correspondence (to subcontractor, A=E)Initiates Submits change order requestInitiates Submits change order: cost proposalInitiates Submits change order: interim reportsInitiates Submits request for information

Subcontractor Initiates Sends correspondence (to contractor only, regarding RFI,work valuation, request for change work, interim reports)

Supplier (optional) Initiates Submits material and equipment cost list


In the second scenario, the contractor sends a change order with a valuation (change ordercost proposal) to the A=E for approval, or the contractor just sends a notice of an occurrenceof a change event � rst, in the form of a change order request, and then sends the change ordercost proposal thereafter. Similar to scenario 1, the A=E checks the change order cost proposaland so on.

Request for information subsystem. This subsystem enables the participants to send requestfor information forms. The system scenarios are: 1) the contractor or subcontractor asks fordesign clari� cation from the A=E, or they may send shop drawings for approval, and 2) theA=E is given a set time according to the contract to review the queries and respond.

Documentation management subsystem. The main function of this subsystem is to recordthe interim cost and schedule changes arising from particular change orders, which can be inthe form of photos, receipts, schedule documents, purchase orders, and so on. The scenariosof this subsystem are: 1) the contractor keeps records to document the change order in terms ofalterations in cost and schedule, which may include cost of material, labour equipment,overheads, pro� t and time delays, and 2) the system should be able to give a summary report ofthe changes of the total cost and schedule regarding any particular change of work.

Business objects. The use case model is analysed to produce the business objects andobjects’ association. There are eight business objects found in this study, as can be seen inFigure 5, which illustrates the association between business objects. The eight businessobjects are:

Figure 4. Change order management system (COMS) ‘use case’ model


1. Correspondence – a document of communication sent by the owner, A=E, contractor orsubcontractor for the purpose of clarifying, asking for information, or informing thereceiving party of intent for a change of work.

2. Change order – a formal document that alters some conditions of the contract document.The change order may alter the contract price, schedule of payments, completion date orthe plans and speci� cations.

3. Change order: cost proposal – an unapproved change order made by the contractor, whichstates the estimated added or deducted contract price and new time of completion (if any),due to the change order request.

4. Change order: approved – a change order contract document that has been approved bythe owner. This documents enables the contractor to commence with the change orderwork.

5. Change order: interim reports – a document that contains interim information regardingthe accumulated cost and schedule of approved change works.

6. Change order request – a document written by the owner, A=E, contractor or subcon-tractor. This document states a change event or intent for a change in a project.

7. Request for information – a form of communication=correspondence, which posesquestions regarding drawings and speci� cations. This form is sent by the contractor orsubcontractor to the A=E.

8. Construction participant – the owner, A=E, contractor, subcontractor or supplier.

The result of this object identi� cation is used to design the COMS database. Amongthe eight objects found, four objects are represented into database tables: change orderrequest (Table A1), change orders (Table A2), correspondence (Table A3), and request forinformation (Table A4). These tables show the business objects and data requirementsneeded in the COMS.

System developmentThe COMS is developed under MicrosoftTM environment by Microsoft AccessTM for data-base development, Active Server Pages (ASP) Visual InterdevTM as a server programming,

Figure 5. Object association model


and Structure Query Language (SQL) for manipulating the data in the Microsoft Accessdatabase.

An example of the application interface for checking the status of the change order isillustrated in Figure 6. The data in this � gure shows that several change orders are sent to thecontractor. By clicking the ‘view’ button, detailed information of the change order can beobtained (Figure 7).

Advantage of COMS compared to a conventional method of change order

This section discusses the advantages of COMS compared to the conventional method ofchange order management by using a simulation of a typical change event. For this purpose, acase study, modi� ed from the Primavera ExpeditionTM, is used. The project consists of asingle-storey, masonry structure with brick siding, housing an automobile and light truckservising centre construction. The service centre has below grade pits ranging from 0.5 to 0.8 mbelow the furnished � oor. This structure involves reinforced concrete, structural steel, masonrywalls and brick siding. The exterior work includes site drainage, paving and landscaping.

A variation issue occurred in this project. During the excavation activity of the trenches, anestimated 10 cubic metres of extra rock was found that was not part of the agreed upon scopeof work. For this, the contractor initiated the process for a possible constructive change order.Figure 8 shows the � ow diagram to be followed in conduction of the change order.

Figure 6. An example of a COMS interface: change order view


Change order process in the conventional paper-based methodIn the conventional method of change order management, a paper-based method is used,where a form must be � lled manually and sent to another party. Table 2 shows the estimatedtime needed to process the change order. In this conventional method, a party needs two daysto � ll in the form and send to the other party. The number of days to complete the changeorder process until it is approved is 12 days.

Change order process in the COMS methodThe change order facilitation conducted through COMS differs only slightly from thetraditional method. The typical change order work� ow is still followed, meaning thatactual negotiations and agreements are not facilitated by the information system, and costand time issues must still be settled through meetings or other traditional means.

The COMS system aids in the following:

° usage of a standard set of forms for each activity in the facilitation process;° prompt delivery of the documents to the addressed construction participant;° means to know if the other party has read your sent document;° record keeping is through a common centralized database, therefore all parties have the

same documents and no con� icts arise regarding loss of particular forms;° mismanagement of documents is avoided.

Figure 7. An example of a COMS interface: change order information


However, the following restrictions arise in the use of the COMS:

° To enable the use of the system a construction participant is required to be connected to theInternet.

° A construction participant is also assumed to check his=her document manager regularly tocheck for any new documents.

° Partnering must be strong between the different construction participants since there willonly be one central database. Each participant must trust the holder of the database andprogram logic.

° The users of the system must have some know how of proper change order documentmanagement concepts like placing the correct document code format.

Figure 8. Flow diagram of the change order procedure


Assuming the use of the COMS system and taking into account the speed at which a docu-ment can be sent through the Internet, it is assumed that the 12 days it took to facilitate thechange order using the traditional means can be cut to six days (Table 3). This is done byeliminating the usual extra day required for each activity for delivery of the documents to theaddressed construction participant.

Conclusion

The potential advantage of Internet technology to deliver information in a timely, remote andaccurate manner for a complex organization can be utilized to manage the change order processin construction projects. The advantages of adopting this technology in the change ordermanagement process are; 1) usage of a standard set of forms for each activity in the facilitationprocess, 2) prompt delivery of the documents to the addressed construction participant, 3) themeans to know if the other party has read the sent document, 4) record keeping is through acommon centralized database, therefore all parties have the same documents and no con� ictsarise regarding loss of particular forms, and 5) mismanagement of documents is avoided.

Table 2 Total duration to complete the change order process: the conventional method

Activities Duration in days

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Contractor sends a changeorder request

5 5

Architect=engineer acknowledgesCOR and requests for a COCP

5 5

Contractor prepares a changeorder: cost proposal

5 5

Architect=engineer assessesCOCP, determines anagreeable price and time

5 5

Owner assesses COAA, af� xessignature for approval

5 5

Contractor creates a COIR forchange order work assessment

5 5

Total time consumed 12 days

Table 3 Total duration to complete the change order process: the COMS method

Activities Duration in days

1 2 3 4 5 6

Contractor sends a change order request 5Architect=engineer acknowledges COR and requests for a COCP 5Contractor prepares a change order cost proposal 5Architect=engineer assesses COCP: determines an agreeable

price and time5

Owner assesses COAA, af� xes signature for approval 5Contractor creates a COIR for change order work assessment 5Total time consumed 6 days


Appendix

Table A1 Data requirements for change order request document

Required Data Remarks

Project informationProject name Refers to the speci�c project nameProject Code Refers to the code assigned to determine each project from

anotherContract number The contract number re� ected in the construction contractContract date The date when the contract was signed and agreed uponOwner The owner’s nameArchitect=engineer The architect=engineer’s nameContractor The contractor’s name

Change order request informationTitle The general topic related to the CORChange order request code The unique code assigned to each COR documentDocument sent date The date when the COR is sent by the initiatorSent to Refers to the person in authority addressed by the COR

documentSent by Refers to the person in authority sending the COR documentWork breakdown structure number Re� ects the code assigned by the contractor to the work to

which the COR is referringWork breakdown structure title Re� ects the title assigned by the contractor to the work to

which the COR is referringContract references Refers to any related contract that is used as references to the

COR, e.g. drawings or specsInitiator’s name The name of the speci�c initiator of the CORInitiator document Refers to any contract that is a basis for executing the COR

documentJob condition Describes the onsite job situation for the intended COR workChange order request justi�cation Reasons=justi�cations of the change order workDescription of work to be done Procedures that are intended to be done to conduct the

change of work

Table A2 Data requirements for change order document

Required data Remarks

Project informationProject name Refers to the speci�c project nameProject code Refers to the code assigned to determine each project from anotherContract number The contract number re� ected in the construction contractContract date The date when the contract was signed and agreed uponOwner The owner’s nameArchitect=engineer The architect=engineer’s nameContractor The contractor’s name

Change order informationTitle The general topic related to the CORChange order code The unique code assigned to each CO documentStatus Determines the level of the change order document, i.e. CO, COCP, COAA,

COAO, or COIRCO sent date The date when the CO was sent by the initiatorCO sent to Refers to the person in authority addressed by the CO document

(continued)


Table A2 Continued


CO sent by Refers to the person in authority sending the CO documentCOCP sent date The date when the COCP was sent by the initiatorCOCP sent to Refers to the person in authority addressed by the COCP documentCOCP sent by Refers to the person in authority sending the COCP documentCOAA sent date The date when the COAA was sent by the initiatorCOAA sent to Refers to the person in authority addressed by the COAA documentCOAA sent by Refers to the person in authority sending the COAA documentCOAO sent date The date when the COAO was sent by the initiatorCOAO sent to Refers to the person in authority addressed by the COAO documentCOAO sent by Refers to the person in authority sending the COAO documentCOIR sent date The date when the COIR was sent by the initiatorCOIR sent to Refers to the person in authority addressed by the COIR documentCOIR sent by Refers to the person in authority sending the COIR documentWork breakdown structure number Re� ects the code assigned by the contractor to the work to which CO

is referringWork breakdown structure title Re� ects the title assigned by the contractor to the work to which CO

is referringContract references Refers to any related contract that is used as references to the CO.

e.g. drawings or specsInitiator’s name The name of the speci�c initiator of the COInitiator document Refers to any contract that is a basis for executing the CO documentChange order work The actual steps involved in conducting the change work

Cost proposal informationOriginal contract price The original agreed contract priceNet change in price Sum of all price changes due to change orders as of present dateCurrent contract price The present current price in consideration of past price changesPresent contract price Change in price due to the proposed change orderNew contract price Probable new contract price due to present proposed change orderOriginal contract time The original agreed contract time for completionNet change in time Sum of all time changes due to change orders as of present dateCurrent contract time The present current time in consideration of past time changesPresent contract time Change in time due to the proposed change orderNew contract time Probable new contract time due to present proposed change order

Change order approval informationOwner approval Owner approval in the form of a signatureDate of owner’s approval Date at which the owner af�xed his signatureOwner’s company name Name of owner’s companyA=E approval A=E approval in the form of a signatureDate of A=E’s approval Date at which the A=E af�xed his signatureA=E’s company name Name of A=E’s companyContractor approval Contractor approval in the form of a signatureContractor’s company name Name of contractor’s company

Change order interim report informationBudget price for change work The agreed upon budget for the change order workAccumulated cost so far The accumulated cost of the change work as of present dateDeviation in case The deviation in actual cost if any, from the budget of the change workEstimated time for change work The agreed upon estimated time for the change order present dateAccumulated time so far The accumulated time used for the change work as of present dateDeviation in time The deviation in actual time consumed, if any, from the estimate time of

the change workChange work comments Any remarks intended by the contractor for the attention of the A=E

regarding the change workContractor’s signature Authenticates the submission of the interim report


Table A3 Data requirements for correspondence document (CORR)



Correspondence InformationTitle The general topic related to the CORRChange request code The unique code assigned to each CORR documentDocument sent date The date the CORR was sent by the initiatorSent to Refers to the person in authority addressed by the CORR documentSent by Refers to the person in authority sending the CORR documentWork breakdown structure number Re�ects the code assigned by the contractor to the work to which CORR

is referringWork breakdown structure title Re�ects the title assigned by the contractor to the work to which CORR

is referringContract references Refers to any related contract that is used as references to the CORR,

e.g. drawings or specsIinitiator’s name The name of the speci�c initiator of the CORRInitiator document Refers to any contract that is a basis for executing the CORR documentSubject Contains the intent of the CORR. This section of the document is where

the construction participants may write down their queries and replies

Table A4 Data requirements for request for information document (RFI)



Change order request informationTitle The general topic related to the RFIRequest for information code The unique code assigned to each RFI documentInitial sent date The date when the RFI was sent by the initiatorInitial sent to Refers to the person in authority addressed by the RFI documentInitial sent by Refers to the person in authority sending the RFI documentWork breakdown structure number Re�ects the code assigned by the contractor to the work to which RFI

is referringWork breakdown structure title Re�ects the title assigned by the contractor to the work to which RFI

is referringContract references Refers to any related contract that is used as references to the RFI, e.g.

drawings or specsInitiator’s name The name of the speci�c initiator of the RFIInitiator document Refers to any contract that is a basis for executing the RFI documentRequest for information Section of the document where the contractor places his request for

informationRequest for information reply The architect=engineer after a designated time replies to the contractor

through this format


References

Al-Saggaf, H.A. 1998: The � ve commandments ofconstruction project delay analysis. CostEngineering 40(4), 37–41.

Arditi, D., Akan, G.T. and Gurdamar, S. l985:Reasons for delays in public projects in Turkey.Construction Management and Economics 3(2),171–81.

Bridges, A.H. 1997: Implicationsof the Internet for theconstruction industry. Automation in Construction6, 45–49.

Bu-Bshait, K. and Manzanera, I. 1990: Claimmanagement. International Journal of ProjectManagement 8(4), 222–28.

Chan, A.P.C. and Yeong, C.M. 1995: A comparisonof strategies for reducing variations. ConstructionManagement and Economics 13(6), 467–73.

Choy, W.K. and Sidwell, A.C. 1991: Sources ofvariations in Australian construction contracts.Building Economist 30(3), 25–30. (Cited inChan, A.P.C. and Yeong, C.M. 1995: Acomparison of strategies for reducing variations.Construction Management and Economics, l3(6),467–73).

Cox, I.D., Morris, J.P., Rogerson, J.H. andJared, G.E. 1999: A quantitative study of postcontract award design changes in construction.Construction Management and Economics 17(4),427–39.

Cox, R.K. 1997: Managing change orders and claims.Journal of Management in Engineering 13(1),24–29.

Deng, Z.M., Li, H., Tam, C.M., Shen, Q.P. andLove, P.E.D. 2001: An application of the Internet-based project management system. Automation inConstruction 10, 239–46.

Ehrenreich-Hansen, F. 1994: Change ordermanagement for construction project. CostEngineering 36(3), 25–28.

Hanna, A.S., Russell, J.S. and Thomack, D. 1998:Quantifying the effect of change orders on electricalconstruction labor ef� ciency. Cost Engineering40(2), 36–40.

Jacob, R.C. 1978: How to cope with claims andchange orders. McGraw Hill’s ConstructionContracting October, 64–65.

Scoones, A. 1999: Electronic exchange of projectinformation: 3COM Project, Phase 2, IT CaseStudy. London: CRC Ltd.

Wallace, D. 1994: Hudson’s building and engineeringcontracts. London: Sweet and Maxwell. (Cited inChan, A.P.C. and Yeong, C.M. 1995: A comparisonof strategies for reducing variations. ConstructionManagement and Economics 13(6), 467–73).

Wilkinson, P. 2000a: Making the connection — a lowcost ‘Extranet’ for construction project teams:Damond Lock Grabowski, IT Case Study.London: CRC Ltd.

Wilkinson, P. 2000b: Electronic issue managementsystem: GreenPark, Reading, IT Case Study.London: CRC Ltd.

Zafar, Z.Q. 1996: Construction project delay analysis.Cost Engineering 38(3), 23–40.


web-based application for managing change orders in construction projects

Documents