One can never forget the human component of the changes! Systems ultimately will be used by people. Planning their proper training is a key step most often forgotten.

I agree. In addition, based on my experience, inclusion of a contingency line item as a percentage of the total IT project budget for unforeseen costs helps ensure the project stays on or even below budget. It also ensures that 100% of funding required for the project is identified proactively.

Technical debt is often overlooked in the planning stage and can drag a project off of plan and out of budget. Don't let the sins of the past impact the well meaning plans of the future. Detail every area of technical debt that exists in your environment and refer to it each time you plan a new project

Very true. Planning is so key and important. As when you fail to plan, you do plan to fail. Ensure costs are tracked and documented.

monitor and control budget for any deviation that can not be preventable within the contingency plan, prepare a Project Change form to show new scope, schedule cost, and start implementing upon stakeholder approval.

The biggest part of communication is transparency and the key item that needs lucidity here is the abilities of the people or teams delivering the next steps in the plan. Do you have the technical know how and if so are you executing in a manner that keeps the project on track

One thing that would be helpful is to keep a regular record of discussions and agreements as the project progress to ensure that expectations are aligned between all the stakeholders involved on the project.

1. Thorough Project Planning: Effective project planning is crucial. Define clear project scopes, objectives, and timelines. 2. Change Control and Stakeholder Communication: Implement a robust change control process. Any changes to the project scope, requirements, or budget should go through a formal approval process.

Evaluate and improve is a fine step to have in post implementation, but it does not have a place in this list if the goal is to be on time and on budget, unless you are evaluating and improving the teams execution to be implemented in later steps. If you are evaluating and improving the technology you are changing then you are creating scope creep

This should be part of your continual improvement initiatives and while it will make you better at controlling the impact of a future change, reviewing change management as a "final step" of project is like close the gate after the cows have gotten out.

One thing that may be helpful is a post mortem of the project to identify which areas of the project did we go beyond the budget and identify things that we should have done to avoid the same. By doing so, you will let experience help you manage your next project within budget.

El asunto aquí no es que los cambios se mantengan en el presupuesto. El punto crítico y relevante es por qué es necesario el cambio y cómo ese cambio necesario satisface los objetivos estratégicos del negocio. Si se obtiene la respuesta, el presupuesto es lo de menos. La organización buscará los recursos necesarios para realizar los cambios. Es muy diferente centrarse en cumplir el "presupuesto" sea como sea (y no excederlo), que enfocarse en el valor que se creará para la organización. Esa mentalidad hace una gran diferencia.

"No plan survives contact with the enemy - Helmuth von Moltke" Minimizing scope creep will give you the best chance of staying in budget. Accurate costing prior to initiation should be self evident. There should be a lot of contingency in all costings (up to 33% more) Relentless monitoring of your burn rate as you progress the implementation. Regular go/no go decision points. Know your organisation's capability to implement change and where the weak points are.