0

An Amendment has significant changes throughout the Scope of Work and Schedule of Deliverables. Majority of the Tasks have either been edited or completely deleted. Should you consider possibly writing a new Contract if such changes alter the scope of the Contract?

Dre
  • 1
  • 1
  • Possibly relevant: Is this within a business, between departments? Between businesses? Something else? – Sarov Apr 30 '18 at 15:50
  • Between business and state agency. – Dre Apr 30 '18 at 15:56
  • Frequently new contracts take much more time than amendments. There are announcement and bidding rules that can consume a lot of time and resources. If you have a contract and the customer is willing to work through an amendment, then it's kind of like getting a sole-source contract. You just need to be sure that the new cost model fits the new work. – Polymath Apr 30 '18 at 16:06

2 Answers2

1

I don't think there's a hard and fast rule on this. In my experience only, there seems to be a general consensus that says if the contract is materially change to negotiate a new contract. I think the reason behind this is to minimize ambiguity, remove possible contradicting language, thus mitigating future disputes.

However, opening up the contract threatens favorable terms to you that are not necessarily impacted by the changes but are up for renegotiation anyway since you are essentially starting over. So as always, trade offs.

David Espina
  • 37,143
  • 4
  • 34
  • 91
0

It sounds like you are following the PMBOK. So what does your Change Management Plan say?
And besides the CMP: I would definitely consider a new or an updated contract. Of course it depends a bit on the relationship between you and your contract partner. But I would address the topic and see their reaction.

Stephan Weinhold
  • 636
  • 4
  • 12