Practice Session 9

Assignment 1:

Maximum Megahertz Project

Olaf Gundersen, the CEO of Wireless Telecom Company. Last year

he accepted the Maximum Megahertz Project suggested by six up-and-
coming young R&D corporate stars. Although Olaf did not truly understand
the technical importance of the project, the creators of the project needed
only $600,000, so it seemed like a good risk. Now the group is asking for
$800,000 more and a six-month extension on a project that is already four
months behind. However, the team feels confident they can turn things
around. The project manager and project team feel that if they hang in
there a little longer they will be able to overcome the roadblocks they are
encountering—especially those that reduce power, increase speed, and
use a new technology battery. Other managers familiar with the project hint
that the power pack problem might be solved, but “the battery problem will
never be solved.” Olaf believes he is locked into this project; his gut feeling
tells him the project will never materialize, and he should get out. John, his
human resource manager, suggested bringing in a consultant to axe the
project.
Olaf decided to call his friend Dawn O’Connor, the CEO of an
accounting software company. He asked her, “What do you do when
project costs and deadlines escalate drastically? How do you handle
doubtful projects?” Her response was, “Let another project manager look at
the project. Ask: ‘If you took over this project tomorrow, could you achieve
the required results, given the extended time and additional money?’
If the answer is no, I call my top management team together and have
them review the doubtful project in relation to other projects in our project
portfolio.” Olaf feels this is good advice.
 Unfortunately, the Maximum Megahertz Project is not an isolated
example. Over the last five years there have been three projects that were
never completed. “We just seemed to pour more money into them, even
though we had a pretty good idea the projects were dying. The cost of
those projects was high; those resources could have been better used on
other projects.” Olaf wonders, “Do we ever learn from our mistakes? How
can we develop a process that catches errant projects early? More
importantly, how do we ease a project manager and team off an errant
project without embarrassment?” Olaf certainly does not want to lose the
six bright stars on the Maximum Megahertz Project.
Olaf is contemplating how his growing telecommunications company
should deal with the problem of identifying projects that should be
terminated early, how to allow good managers to make mistakes without
public embarrassment, and how they all can learn from their mistakes.
Give Olaf a plan of action for the future that attacks the problem. Be
specific and provide examples that relate to Wireless Telecom Company.

Assignment 2:

A complex aerospace engineering project is nearing completion. Because

the work is highly technical and new to the organization, the product of the
project was released two months later than planned. Despite the late
delivery, management is appreciative of the effort expended and believes
that this product will generate additional opportunities for the organization.
Management also thinks that the experience of this team will provide great
value for teams working on similar projects in the future. The sponsor
requests that lessons learned be thoroughly documented. Lessons learned
are best completed by:
1) The project manager
 2) The team
3) The sponsor
4) The stakeholders
Please explain your answer.

Assignment 3
Tom Bray Case

Tom Bray was mulling over today’s work schedule as he looked

across the bay at the storm that was rolling in. It was the second official day
of the Pegasus project and now the real work was about to begin.
Pegasus was a two-month renovation project for AtlantiCorp, a major
financial institution headquartered in Boston, Massachusetts. Tom’s group
was responsible for installing the furniture and equipment in the newly
renovated accounts receivable department on the third floor. The Pegasus
project was a dedicated project team formed out of AtlantiCorp facilities
department with Tom as the project lead.
Tom was excited because this was his first major league project and
he was looking forward to practicing a new management style—MBWA,
aka management by wandering around. He had been exposed to MBWA in
a business class in college, but it wasn’t until he attended an AtlantiCorp
leadership training seminar that he decided to change how he managed
people. The trainer was a devout MBWA champion (“You can’t manage
people from a computer!”). Furthermore, the testimonies from his peers
reinforced the difference that MBWA can make when it comes to working
on projects.
Tom had joined the facilities group at AtlantiCorp five years earlier
after working for EDS for six years. He quickly demonstrated technical
competences and good work habits. He was encouraged to take all the
internal project management workshops offered by AtlantiCorp. On his last
two projects he served as assistant project manager responsible for
procurement and contract management.
He had read books about the soft side of project management and
MBWA made sense—after all, people not tools get projects done. His boss
had told him he needed to refine his people skills and work on developing
rapport with team members. MBWA seemed like a perfect solution.
Tom reviewed the list of team member names; some of the foreign
names were real tongue twisters. For example, one of his better workers
was from Thailand and her name was Pinyarat Sirisomboonsuk. He
practiced saying “Pin-ya-răt See-rē-som-boon-sook.”
He got up, tucked in his shirt, and walked out of his office and down
to the floor where his team was busy unloading equipment.
Tom said “Hi” to the first few workers he met until he encountered
Jack and three other workers. Jack was busy pulling hardware out of a box
while his teammates were standing around talking. Tom blurted, “Come on
guys, we’ve got work to do.” They quickly separated and began unloading
boxes.
The rest of the visit seemed to go well. He helped Shari unload a
heavy box and managed to get an appreciative grin from Pinyarat when he
almost correctly pronounced her name. Satisfied, Tom went back up to his
office thinking that MBWA wouldn’t be that tough to do.
After responding to e-mail and calling some vendors, Tom ventured
back out to see how things were going downstairs. When he got there, the
floor was weirdly quiet. People were busy doing their work and his attempts
at generating conversation elicited stiff responses. He left thinking that
maybe MBWA is going to be tougher than he thought.
1. What do you think is going on at the end of this case?
2. What should Tom do next and why?
3. What can be learned from this case?
Assignment 4
The Accounting Software Installation Project

Sitting in her office, Karin Chung is reviewing the past four months of
the large corporate accounting software installation project she has been
managing. Everything seemed so well planned before the project started.
Each company division had a task force that provided input into the
proposed installation along with potential problems. All the different
divisions had been trained and briefed on exactly how their division would
interface and use the forthcoming accounting software. All six contractors,
which included one of the Big Four consulting companies, assisted in
developing the work breakdown structure—costs, specifications, time.
Karin hired a consultant to conduct a one-day “partnering” workshop
attended by the major accounting heads, a member of each task force
group, and key representatives from each of the contractors. During the
workshop, several different teambuilding exercises were used to illustrate
the importance of collaboration and effective communication. Everyone
laughed when Karin fell into an imaginary acid pit during a human bridge-
building exercise. The workshop ended on an upbeat note with everyone
signing a partnering charter that expressed their commitment to working
together as partners to complete the project.

Two months later

One task force member came to Karin to complain that the contractor
dealing with billing would not listen to his concerns about problems that
could occur in the Virginia division when billings are consolidated. The
contractor had told him, the task force member, he had bigger problems
than consolidation of billing in the Virginia division. Karin replied, “You can
settle the problem with the contractor. Go to him and explain how serious
your problem is and that it will have to be settled before the project is
completed.”
Later in the week in the lunchroom she overheard one consulting
contractor badmouthing the work of another—“never on time, interface
coding not tested.” In the hallway the same day an accounting department
supervisor told her that tests showed the new software will never be
compatible with the Georgia division’s accounting practices.
While concerned, Karin considered these problems typical of the kind
she had encountered on other smaller software projects.

Four months later

The project seemed to be falling apart. What happened to the positive

attitude fostered at the team-building workshop? One contractor wrote a
formal letter complaining that another contractor was sitting on a coding
decision that was delaying their work. The letter went on: “We cannot be
held responsible or liable for delays caused by others.” The project was
already two months behind, so problems were becoming very real and
serious. Karin finally decided to call a meeting of all parties to the project
and partnering agreement.
She began by asking for problems people were encountering while
working on the project. Although participants were reluctant to be first for
fear of being perceived as a complainer, it was not long before accusations
and tempers flared out of control. It was always some group complaining
about another group. Several participants complained that others were
sitting on decisions that resulted in their work being held up. One
consultant said, “It is impossible to tell who’s in charge of what.” Another
participant complained that although the group met separately on small
problems, it never met as a total group to assess new risk situations that
developed.
 Karin felt the meeting had degenerated into an unrecoverable
situation. Commitment to the project and partnering appeared to be
waning. She quickly decided to stop the meeting and cool things down. She
spoke to the project stakeholders: “It is clear that we have some serious
problems, and the project is in jeopardy. The project must get back on
track, and the backbiting must stop. I want each of us to come to a meeting
Friday morning with concrete suggestions of what it will take to get the
project back on track and specific actions of how we can make it happen.
We need to recognize our mutual interdependence and bring our
relationships with each other back to a win/win environment. When we do
get things back on track, we need to figure out how to stay on track.”

1. Why does this attempt at project partnering appear to be failing?

2. If you were Karin, what would you do to get this project back on track?
3. What action would you take to keep the project on track?

Assignment 5

Imagine you are conducting a review of the International Space Station

project. Research press coverage and the Internet to collect information on
the current status of the project. What are the successes and failures to
date? What forecasts would you make about the completion of the project,
and why? What recommendations would you make to top management of
the program, and why?