Why this matters
As a Business Analyst, you are the source of truth when scope shifts and decisions evolve. A clear Change Log prevents scope creep and budget surprises. A Decision Log stops re-litigating old choices, aligns stakeholders, and accelerates delivery.
- Real tasks: capture scope changes from steering committees, document product decisions from design reviews, link decisions to requirements and versions, and share a concise snapshot with stakeholders.
- Benefits: traceability, risk reduction, faster onboarding, easier audits, and predictable delivery.
Who this is for
- Business Analysts and Product Analysts
- Project Managers needing reliable traceability
- New team members inheriting a project mid-flight
Prerequisites
- Basic understanding of requirements (epics, user stories, acceptance criteria)
- Familiarity with your team's tooling (docs, spreadsheets, ticketing)
- Stakeholder map (who approves, who informs)
Concept explained simply
Two small logs, two big outcomes:
- Change Log: a running list of modifications to scope, requirements, timelines, or budget.
- Decision Log: a running list of choices made, the options considered, and why the final choice won.
Mental model
Think "Timeline + Vault". The Change Log is a timeline of what changed and when. The Decision Log is a vault storing the rationale behind choices. Together, they explain both the movie (what happened) and the script (why we did it).
What to capture
Minimum fields for a Change Log
- ID
- Date raised
- Requester
- Change summary
- Reason / driver
- Impact (scope, cost, schedule, quality)
- Priority
- Status (Proposed, In Review, Approved, Rejected, Implemented)
- Decision reference (link or ID of decision)
- Effective date
- Owner
Minimum fields for a Decision Log
- ID
- Date
- Decision statement
- Context / problem
- Options considered
- Criteria used
- Final decision
- Rationale
- Owner
- Review date (optional)
- Related artifacts (requirements, designs, change IDs)
Nice-to-have fields: risk notes, affected teams, version number, approval authority or quorum, follow-up tasks.
How to run it (day-to-day)
Capture changes/decisions immediately after meetings or as soon as requests arrive. Use a single source (doc or sheet). Avoid scattered copies.
Clarify summary, reason, impact, and status. If info is missing, add a "Needs Info" note and an owner.
Record who decided, when, and why. If rejected, capture the rejection reason to prevent repeated proposals.
Link change entries to decision entries and to requirement IDs and versions. This creates traceability.
Share weekly digest: new proposals, approvals, and any schedule impact. Keep it short.
At sprint review or milestone gates, skim the logs to confirm nothing is dangling in "In Review" without an owner.
Versioning tip
Use a simple scheme like v1.3. If the change is breaking or major scope shift, increment the first digit. Otherwise, increment the second.
Status definitions you can reuse
- Proposed: captured but not analyzed
- In Review: under evaluation by stakeholders
- Approved: accepted and queued for implementation
- Rejected: will not proceed (reason required)
- Implemented: change is live/effective
Worked examples
Example 1 — Scope reduction mid-sprint
- Change ID: CH-017
- Date: 2025-02-10
- Requester: Product Manager
- Summary: Remove CSV export from MVP
- Reason: Time constraint to hit regulatory deadline
- Impact: Scope -1 feature; Schedule +0; Quality unchanged; Risk reduced for compliance
- Priority: High
- Status: Approved
- Decision ref: DC-044
- Effective: 2025-02-12
- Owner: BA
Decision DC-044 (same day): chose to defer CSV export; rationale: core compliance features must ship. Options considered: defer CSV vs extend deadline vs add temporary staff. Criteria: compliance date immovable; staffing not feasible. Final: defer CSV.
Example 2 — Data model choice
- Decision ID: DC-051
- Date: 2025-03-03
- Decision: Use UUIDs for customer IDs
- Context: Merge risk across regions; need globally unique keys
- Options: Auto-increment, UUID, Composite
- Criteria: Uniqueness, simplicity, performance
- Final: UUID
- Rationale: Simplest cross-region uniqueness; perf impact acceptable
- Related: REQ-129, CH-022 (schema update)
Example 3 — Regulatory change
- Change ID: CH-026
- Date: 2025-04-15
- Requester: Compliance
- Summary: Add consent logging for analytics tracking
- Reason: New privacy requirement
- Impact: Scope +2 stories; Schedule +1 sprint; Quality higher; Budget +$5k (Varies by country/company; treat as rough ranges.)
- Status: In Review
- Owner: BA
Notes: pending legal approval; preliminary decision draft DC-059 prepared with two options (central vs per-service consent store).
Copy-paste templates (simple)
Change Log row template
ID: Date raised: Requester: Change summary: Reason/Driver: Impact (scope/cost/schedule/quality): Priority: Status: Decision reference: Effective date: Owner: Related requirements/versions: Notes:
Decision Log row template
ID: Date: Decision statement: Context/Problem: Options considered: Criteria used: Final decision: Rationale: Owner: Review date (optional): Related artifacts (requirements/changes): Notes:
Exercises
Do these in your own doc or spreadsheet. Keep each answer to one concise row per log.
Exercise 1 (ex1) — Turn a messy email into a Change Log row
Email excerpt: "Team, we’re under pressure to deliver onboarding by Friday. Let’s drop the in-app tour and just keep the checklist. Dev lead says dropping the tour doesn’t affect data model. Can PM confirm?"
- Task: Create a complete Change Log row using the template.
- Goal: A one-line summary, reason, impact, status, and a clear owner.
Self-check checklist
- [ ] Summary is action-oriented (what changes)
- [ ] Reason is explicit (deadline pressure)
- [ ] Impact touches scope and schedule at minimum
- [ ] Status is realistic (Proposed or In Review)
- [ ] An owner is assigned
Exercise 2 (ex2) — Capture a Decision from a chat thread
Chat excerpt: "We compared S3 vs. database BLOBs. Ops prefers S3 due to lifecycle policies. Dev says both work. Security okay with either if encrypted. Let's go S3 for cost and archival."
- Task: Create a Decision Log row with options, criteria, decision, and rationale.
- Goal: Make the rationale unambiguous and linkable to storage requirements (use placeholders for IDs).
Self-check checklist
- [ ] Options include at least two real choices
- [ ] Criteria reflect cost, security, operations, and performance
- [ ] Final decision is one clear sentence
- [ ] Rationale mentions the winning criteria
Common mistakes and how to self-check
- Vague summaries: Replace "adjust timeline" with "move beta release from May 10 to May 24".
- Missing rationale: Always include why, or the debate restarts later.
- Unowned items: Every Proposed/In Review entry must have an owner.
- Stale status: Review weekly and move old "In Review" items forward or close them.
- Decisions without options: If no options were considered, it’s likely an assumption, not a decision.
- No links: Add requirement/story IDs or version notes to anchor the change.
Self-audit in 3 minutes
- [ ] Every row has a date, status, owner
- [ ] Every decision row lists at least two options and criteria
- [ ] Every change row states impact across scope/schedule/cost/quality (at least two)
- [ ] Rejected items include the reason
- [ ] Weekly digest prepared or scheduled
Practical projects
- Project 1: Create a shared Change & Decision Log for a small feature. Populate 10 realistic entries from past meetings.
- Project 2: Add IDs and link entries to three requirement documents or story IDs. Run a weekly 5-minute review.
- Project 3: Build a one-page stakeholder digest summarizing the last 7 days: new proposals, approvals, rejected, risks.
Learning path
- Start: Learn to capture crisp summaries and reasons
- Next: Add impact analysis and link to requirements
- Then: Establish cadence and stakeholder digest
- Advanced: Versioning, audit readiness, and metrics (lead time from Proposed to Approved)
Next steps
- Adopt the templates above in your active project this week
- Run a 10-minute weekly log review with key stakeholders
- Take the quick test below; if you pass, move on to change governance
Quick Test
This test is available to everyone. Only logged-in users will have their progress saved.
Mini challenge
Find one ongoing debate in your project. Write a Decision Log entry with two options and clear criteria. Share it with the group and ask, "What would change this decision in the future?" Capture that as a review note.