The Importance of Change Control

Most businesses are a long and complicated string of systems and procedures that have been developed by management over the course of time in an effort to maintain a sense of order, quality and stability among the organization.  The larger an organization becomes; the more employees take it upon themselves to change these systems out of laziness or just because they think their way is better.  It’s a natural occurrence that can develop without warning.  Controlling the change of protocol can get quite challenging, particularly if a company has multiple locations and/or departments.

Unless the inmates are running the prison, management must take control over how things get done at a company.  This is the very function of management.  Otherwise, there is no need to pay certain individuals a higher salary to oversee certain employees or departments.  When management puts a procedure into place, it becomes company law and must be followed.  If employees begin to change this protocol out of laziness, it’s managements responsibility to bump them back into compliance.  However, sometimes employees do come up with good ideas that might actually make sense and possibly be more efficient than the policies initiated by management.

Regardless of whether the employee believes their process is more efficient, it should be presented to management for approval before being implemented.  However, if they take it upon themselves to implement their process without approval, it could lead to a breakdown in the system.  For example, the employee could be under the illusion that their concept offers a better process than management’s, but it really doesn’t.  If it is, in fact, a more efficient way of doing things, then it should be implemented in other departments or offices as well after being approved.

Companies that are large enough for this to take place should have a mechanism available to employees to suggest a change in procedural protocol.  If management approves the change, then implementation can commence accordingly.  However, what happens when change evolves on its own in an unapproved manner?  Management must be aware that this could take place and be able to execute corrective measures to revert systems back to their original form.

This may call for regular internal audits to be conducted on a periodic basis.  Some larger companies have teams dedicated to this process.  A company’s operating system is proprietary information that management has deemed a proven method.  If employees deviate from this system, complications may arise.  One way to avoid this from happening is by the development of an extensively written policy and procedure manual which defines the company’s system and is available for all employees to reference. 

If dedicating an entire team or department to change control is impractical in your company’s case, the responsibility can be given to one particular employee or made part of one employees role within the company.  This Compliance Officer is responsible for conducting audits to ensure systems set forth by management are being followed and not altered in any way.  The Compliance Officer can also act as an intermediary by presenting employee-proposed changes to management.

If a company is successful and has been in existence for an extended period of time, chances are the systems that are in place are sufficient and should not be altered.  This doesn’t mean they can’t be improved from time-to-time, especially as times and industries change.  Sometimes a business owner may be too involved in his/her own function to recognize these unapproved changes and could lead to a decline in quality, and increase in expenses or a decrease in revenue.