When government agencies and organizations evaluate new software, they usually start with a vision: streamlined workflows, reduced costs, better compliance, and easier access to information. Vendors often reinforce this vision during the sales process by promising that their software platform will “meet all your needs out-of-the-box.”
But once implementation begins, a different story often emerges. Requirements that seemed straightforward during the buying process suddenly have components that become “custom.” Integration with existing systems requires unexpected effort. Workflows must be reconfigured at extra cost. Buyers soon discover that the initial contract value was only the starting point and the true expense is higher with a growing list of change orders.
Why software change orders occur
Change orders are often used in software projects as a mechanism for filling the gap between the product that was sold and the solution the customer actually needs.
Several factors drive the software change orders:
- Sales vs. delivery disconnect
Sales teams emphasize flexibility and capabilities, while delivery teams must translate that into functioning systems. - Limited discovery
Procurement processes often prioritize speed and cost over deep requirements analysis for both software and data. - Rigid architectures
Many software architectures may not support true adaptability, making customization the default answer when clients ask for changes.
The impact on agencies
For government and public-sector organizations, these practices create ripple effects far beyond budget overruns.
- Budget pressure: Change orders consume funds that could have been used for training, support, or other improvements.
- Delays: Each customization adds time, extending project timelines and eroding confidence.
- Staff frustration: End-users experience delays in receiving the tools they were promised, which can lead to lower adoption and morale.
In some cases, projects are scaled back or abandoned altogether because change orders make them financially unsustainable.
Best practices for enterprise software changes
According to the U.S. TechFAR Hub, agencies should expect requirements to evolve as part of the agile development process for digital services contracts. The challenge is to ensure these refinements remain within scope, so that change orders don’t become a default mechanism for project delivery.
Here are some practices we recommend as part of a procurement process:
- Expect and plan for evolving requirements. Contracts should be written with the understanding that requirements are not fully knowable upfront.
- Distinguish outcomes from technical specifications. Define outcomes and user needs rather than locking in rigid technical specifications. Create user stories and business requirements as part of the scope.
- Build flexibility and milestones into the contract. Build in smaller deliverable components within the implementation project so that you can pivot, if needed, without triggering massive change orders.
- Use agile delivery to reduce risk. By delivering in increments and providing agency feedback, staff can spot misalignment earlier, reducing the need for large, expensive changes orders later on.
- Choose software that can adapt with changes to technology or processes. Ask a prospective vendor to speak to how their architecture will adapt not only to the nuances of your work processes but also as new technology is adapted over time. Inquire how much reliance on the vendor will be needed for future adjustments so that long-term costs are kept low.
- Focus on your data needs right from the beginning. A common cause of change requests center on data, impacting both the database and applications. Examining data needs first and then transforming the data to work best with the new solution can help create better adaptability to new user needs later on. A thorough review of reporting needs helps in this effort.
- Include program staff in the RFP and contract processes. Agency program managers and contract officers should collaborate continuously so that the project contract should reflect real user needs.
- Select a vendor that demonstrates strong project management skills. Your software provider should know how to articulate each step, collaborate with you towards end results while keeping clear records of backlog items, refinements, and acceptance criteria so all stakeholders (vendor, program staff and contract team) can see how work evolves and stays within the scope.
How nVIRO works to address change orders
At Windsor Solutions, we’ve seen firsthand how agencies struggle with change-order fatigue. That experience shaped the design of nVIRO, our regulatory lifecycle management solution. Instead of forcing every client into the same mold, nVIRO provides a configurable foundation that agencies can shape to their unique requirements.
With nVIRO, state environmental agencies can manage permitting, compliance, enforcement, and public engagement without requiring constant customization. The system’s flexibility comes from thoughtful design, not through bolted-on fixes. We address your evolving data needs through custom form configurations – which program staff can manage and update over time on their own. nVIRO is designed for scalability and adaptability: that means fewer change orders, lower total cost of ownership, and faster time to getting to your vision for improving the work processes and data quality.
When possible, we perform a discovery analysis:
- We meet with our client’s program teams to obtain a general understanding of business processes and how they may be performed using our solution.
- We identify where potential gaps and/or opportunities exist that should be taken into consideration. Gaps may be addressed via changes in business processes and/or by identifying and implementing system enhancements.
- At the conclusion of our discovery analysis, we confirm with our client the scope for the implementation effort and then the costs and high-level schedule can be finalized prior to a client’s decision to proceed.
This above diagram shows one view into some of the functions supported by nVIRO. We find a discovery process important to understand the requirements and workflows.
Conclusion
Change orders will always exist, but they don’t need to define every technology project. Agencies that carefully evaluate vendor promises, look for configurable platforms, and demand evidence of sustainable implementations can avoid the cycle of hidden costs and delays.
Software should empower organizations, not drain resources. By prioritizing adaptability and defining the requirements based on business outcomes, agencies can select solutions that deliver on their promises — without the fine print. At Windsor, that’s the philosophy behind nVIRO. It’s more than a product; it’s a commitment to helping agencies succeed without the burden of endless customization.
About Windsor Solutions
All environmental agencies have unlimited challenges but with limited resources. Our job has been to enable them to be better at their tasks, which includes helping them with quicker visibility, stronger workflow efficiencies and better tools to act with precision. We can show you how nVIRO could work for your program and agency and would be happy to show you, even if you are not yet at the point of seeking an immediate solution today.
If you’d like to comment on this blog or contact us, we’d love to hear from you.
Vic Kaiser, Project Director, Windsor Solutions
