Another small change, another afternoon of redesign
The architect emails on Tuesday: the client wants to move the plant room to the roof. Could you just check the steelwork can take it? Your engineer checks. It cannot, not without new beams, a revised bracing layout and a fresh look at the foundations below the core. Two days later the structure is redesigned and reissued. Nobody mentioned fees because it felt like part of keeping the project moving.
Multiply that by every scheme change over a year and a practice is giving away a real share of its design effort. Each change felt too small to argue about when it arrived. Together they are the difference between a job that paid and one that did not.
Why extra work slips through
- Changes arrive informally, in emails and design team meetings, not as instructions.
- The engineer doing the work is focused on the design, not on the appointment terms.
- Hours for the change are booked to the same job code as the base scope, so they disappear into it.
- By the time a director reviews the job, nobody can separate what the change cost.
- Raising fees late feels confrontational, so it is often dropped.
The underlying problem is timing. The best moment to note that something may be an additional service is the moment it is requested, and that is exactly when nobody has time to think about it.
What unbilled changes cost
| What happens today | Effect |
|---|---|
| Change done without a record | Fee absorbed, and no evidence if you ask later |
| Hours mixed with base scope | Stage looks overrun with no explanation |
| Fee raised months later | Client disputes it, relationship strained |
| No pattern visible | Same client or architect keeps generating free work |
There is also a morale cost. Engineers who spend evenings redesigning for changes that the practice never charges for notice, and they learn that the extra effort is not valued.
How we build a scope change log
- We add a 'possible change' button to the places engineers already work: the RFI log, the project mailbox, or a simple form on a phone.
- Flagging a change takes the triggering email or meeting note, a one-line description and the drawings affected.
- Each change gets its own time code, so hours spent on it are recorded separately from the base scope.
- The project director reviews new changes weekly and marks each as within scope, chargeable, or to discuss.
- For chargeable changes, the tool drafts a short fee letter or additional services notice from your template, with the hours so far and the instruction attached.
- Changes and their status are summarised per project, so fee discussions happen with evidence.
- Across projects, a report shows which clients and design teams generate the most change, useful when pricing the next job with them.
The decision about whether something is inside the appointment stays with the director and the appointment itself. The tool's job is to make sure the question gets asked while the facts are fresh.
After a few months of logging changes
Engineers flag a change in less time than it takes to complain about it. Directors see a short weekly list and can raise the fee conversation early, often before the redesign starts, which is when clients are most willing to agree.
Even the changes you decide not to charge for are now visible. That is useful goodwill to point to, and it feeds straight into how you price the next proposal.
Does this happen in your practice?
- Scheme changes are redesigned without anyone mentioning fees.
- Time for changes is booked to the base job code.
- Additional fees are raised months after the work.
- Some clients or architects always seem to cost more than the fee.
- Engineers do not know what the appointment actually covers.