Would you wait for the variation to be approved or implement the change in the project without approval, if time is a real issue?

I would go for one of the two options:

• I'd get hold of the architect/designer whoever is responsible, discuss the situation with him, get and record his verbal agreement and start the job.
• If the design team is from the client and not trustworthy I would request in written to expedite and intimate that the delay is being counted on their side.

Change is inevitable. During a project there will be many good reasons why things need to change. There will also be a few bad reasons - bad, but unavoidable. But there will also be many requests where the right answer is "no".

We have to wait to find out if it is a "NO".

thanks for the invitation ,

Agree with given answers before .

It depends on condition,

I prefer to get the written approval, if it was not possible, I get it  verbally, but in case of necessity for prompt action and no way for getting approval I will act 

Considering current market condition,I prefer to wait for approved variation order before proceeding with implementation of the same.

This will depend on the value of the change and the engineering sense, but any case you should connect the architectural design and to make official documents like a letters or reports to clear the responsibilities for every one 

thanks for invitation ....

i agree with previous answers

Working in construction for years you always see changes in every aspect of the projects and to answer the question stated above, first you have to review all the possibilities when it comes to financial caused, however you also have to look for the best and good for the project how will affect changes of all the aspect financial and time perspective. If you want to changes in the project free to relay all the possibilities of the changes and wait for the approval.

Usually time is not a stain for variation order, but continuing in making changes with VO approval from highest level of parties is essential for proceeding in variation execution, this not theoretical but empirical lesson for everyone.

When the scope of a project changes orthe method for building then alll theses areas need consideration. Itis the cost manager or quality surveyor who sholud considerate on the commercial implication to any changes but he or she should consult closely with the planner, project manager and designer, so that the full impact of the change can be assesed.  The project team will be required to aprove or reject each change formally logged within the proces. If a change is rejested, there may be a requirement for the team to review an alternative proposal, rework the desig or change the methode of working. If a change is approved then the funding of the change will need to be considered.

Even normal changes can vary in terms of the complexity of the change management process they go through. Major service changes which impact multiple organizational divisions will require a detailed change proposal in addition to the RFC, and will need to be approved by the IT management board. Very high cost or high risk changes will need approval by the business executive board. However low risk changes can be approved by a CAB or change advisory board.

In the ITIL world, there are three kinds of changes: standard, normal, and emergency changes. Let’s put emergency changes to one side for the moment, and distinguish between the two other types of changes. Normal changes are those that go through the regular change management process, which starts with the creation of an RFC which is then reviewed, assessed, and then either authorized or rejected, and then (if authorized) planned and implemented.

A good change management system ensures that all affected parameters are identified and analyzed for any impact before the change is implemented to the system, in order to avoid or minimize the adverse effects.

Change control and variation maagement covers a wide area and affect many pople across a project during its life-cycle. It can be a complicated area and if not controlled properly can lead to a lack of understunding as the final outcome of a project so its better to go tru approval fase not implement the change in the project without approval.

I would strongly agree for Mr.Zain ul-Abdin  and Mr. Md. Fazlur Rahman Expert answers , which  are worthy of respect and appreciations