Name: Bassal Mehmood Talha

Matriculation no: 75681

Case: Teradyne Corporation: The Jaguar project

Q1: Compare and contrast teradyne’s traditional project execution strategy to the approach it used in
Jaguar? What was similar? What was different?

Ans: Terad
Ans: Teradyne’s
yne’s traditional project execution strategy differed in many ways to the new approach they
used in Jaguar. I will compare the first one with the later to have a detailed idea about how both
differed.

Traditional project execution:

In this prevailing strategy Teradyne did not had a very centralized approach to handle project
management issues instead it was left up to the team or members to decide on most part which things
are essential and how they plan.

 In regards to the Goals of the project they

project they were not made clear at the start of the project
because the requirements were not fully understood or received by the group and so while
developing the product the additional requirements were added which in turn increased the
time and cost of the project. The goal was not clearly predefined.
 Due to which the project status was
status was not easily track-able by the higher management
 The Tools used to manage the project were not clearly defined as it was a decentralized system
individual departments were left to decide which tools to use to track progress, although
teradyne had mandated certain specific tools but it was more dependent on the people of
certain department
 Tracking the project was a big issue also because different departments were working at
different pace also using numerous tools including phase gate, detailed project planning and
they might not be even used by the other departments.
 Testing was largely based on market segment focused platforms , and for each segment market
there was a different test platform, which made things even difficult and the whole process and
workload was immense
 Due to which the Resources of the company were not allocated efficiently resulting
resulting in over
committing to projects by over 300%.

Jaguar project execution strategy:

 In regards to the Goals of the project they

project they were well defined before the project started, the
requirements
requirements were well taken into account and changes in scope of the project were not
allowed due to which delivery date was finalized
 Project status could
status could be easily track-able due to the above mentioned changes in the approach
and the visibility of tasks was available
  The Tools used in the new execution strategy were sophisticated like 3 point estimations, critical
path analysis, earned value analysis, and work breakdown structure and they were formalized in
the company so that every department can be tracked and can be seen where they are in the
project
 Tracking was made possible due to above mentioned tools and it gave accurate tracking of
project status along its supply chain
 Testing was based on flexible platform strategy, “one shoe fits all”. Reduced time, cost and
increased efficiency.
 Resources commitment was made correct although sometimes people were pressurized to
difficult commitments to keep a bit of tension in the process so people are more responsible.

Q2: The Jaguar project involved both hardware and software. Should the same project management
management
methodology have been used for both? Why or why not?

Ans: The Jaguar project involved both hardware and software tools to help complete project on time
and efficiently, this was a methodology tested in the Jaguar project but both hardware and software
processes had their own timelines and synchronizing them was a challenging task, as it appeared while
the hardware people were completing their processes on time, the software people were lagging
behind, they were not much focused on making software that can help reduce time and be more
efficient and help them in the overall project rather they were trying to perfect the software which in
return made their work more and lengthy and were not able to keep up with the hardware department,
not that they wanted to perfect the software, but while they were transforming the work and trying to
create softwares that can help them in tasks as well as easy to understand so whatever was happening
with the software department at Jaguar project was a bit natural like for example while they were using
windows NT system based software called FLEX, they were doing lot debugging of it and trying to make
it work smooth which was important for the project and it had to be done but what resulted was that
they were way behind, as in the meetings they will catch up but it was not the case, they were not
catching up according to the time frame and so as a result O’Brien kept the deadline in place to have an
atmosphere of pressure amongst coworkers. Of course you cannot declare the software department
non important or not as significant as hardware department
department because in case of Jaguar the senior
management
management reportedly told that if FLEX doesn’t succeed, there won’t be any market for Jaguar so by
these statements we can deduce that software tools were the most critical part of Jaguar which had to
be developed with care and consistency for the success of overall project. One of the most important
factor to keep in mind is that this was the first time they were doing the Jaguar project and of course
things to develop according to the company’s requirement had to take time because naturally when you
are transitioning to a new system, it takes more time and more mistakes and correction of such mistakes
takes more time, so this is not true to just paint the picture with one color that the software department
was only responsible for delays, it might be and once it is perfected, it will help in future projects to
reduce time significantly and such future benefits can only be achieved at the cost of initiation of such
tools at the first place, which can take more time and it did. Also to only blame software department is
not correct as senior management was not giving much importance to the data because of its skepticism
around the metric. So in order to strike a balance between both although for the first time it may seem
difficult and not perfect but to just make it closer to better what can be done is hardware timeline can
be shifted according to developments at software department so that hardware department is finished
with its core processes and processes which might require the need of software at certain points can be
delayed and till the point to where software would be up and running and such processes can be carried
out then without delaying the overall time of the project necessarily. Also management at the software
department shall pay more attention towards the data and development of software so it can be
completed on time and also the scheduling tools should be used in software department to give them a
timeline of the processes which shall be done at the designated times, and to have a responsibility of
the time frame in which they should be finishing their tasks to align in the overall process with hardware
department.

Q3: What lessons should Teradyne take away from the Jaguar project? What changes do you
recommend for the future product development projects?

Ans: Lessons they should learn:

 Create a harmony between the managers and the team to be more efficient, as project
management tools helped towards completion of projects, some managers took it as a
distraction and some as beneficial.
 Team members should be trained in advance of the tools they are going to use to take out the
maximum potential and benefit of them
 It is not profitable to dwell over metrics learning and perfecting them. Their job is to help in the
project not delay the project.
 They should not get the tools get in their way of work and reduce efficiency rather than at the
first place the job of such tools is ironically to improve the efficiency
 Uncertainty shall be reduced in the future projects and the management shall not rely entirely
upon tools and software’
software’s and different metrics

Recommendations:

 Management of the people in the organization, strong resistance from the people should have
been managed in a more professional way through human management skills and by providing
them with appropriate skills that can help them reduce resistance and support change so that
they can get on with it more quickly
 Too much reliance on tools can be limiting the human capability of operating at its best, on the
worst part it can even reduce the intelligence
intelligence of the people so more focus should be on
developing smart workforce
workforce that can make use of such tools effectively and intelligently
intelligently
 Their focus while on projects shall not be in producing more data and making excessive use of
tools rather producing quality
quality data that can help them in processes and using tools in a way that
can help the whole process and fulfilling projects on time, it should not make their work more
hefty and lengthy