EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Introduction: As of February 2009, MediSys Corp. was 6 months away from their launch of the
IntensCare product, a patient monitoring system for the hospital segment. MediSys was under strict
timelines due to a new and aggressive president. MediSys had been working on the IntensCare product
since September 2006 and was facing both project challenges and team infighting. Additionally, there was
a product requirements conflict in the team: Valerie Merz, the team’s marketing manager, was pushing for
a modular design while the engineering and software teams did not have the resources to accommodate
the modular designs. The engineering and software teams want to avoid getting into conflict with Valerie
and intend to have a direct conversation with their superiors by circumventing Valerie.

Analysis: Technical challenges aside, the team is struggling with trust. There is no transparency in
communication within the project team. Each department is keeping their issues to themselves to avoid
conflict with Merz. Historically, the product development cycle has been sequential. To meet aggressive
deadlines, the new parallel product development proposed by the President, Art Beaumont, has resulted
in substantial pressure on the team. To meet the market demand, the product will need to be delivered on
time. Per an economic study developed by McKinsey & Co., going over budget results in only a 4%
reduction of profits whereas delays would cause 33% reduction. Thus, the focus should be to get a
minimum viable product (MVP) delivered timely by prioritizing effectively (Exhibit A).

Advantages of proposed approach:

 Reduce Valerie’s frustrations and help her manage customer expectations.

 Prioritize the features required for meeting the launch dates with a successful MVP.
 Open communication amongst all departments to alleviate tensions and improve coherence
amongst them.
 Visibility of risks to all stakeholders so that mitigation measures can be developed.

Disadvantages of proposed approach:

 Increased workload for Valerie and the team in general to implement in planning and using the
proposed tools.
 Resistance by the team to change existing working habits and norms.
 Realigning customer expectations of the deliverables.

Recommendations: For the team to take on working towards success in the project team, Valerie can
work along with the team to deliver the MVP before the deadline through the following recommendations:

 The team is struggling with collaboration and lacks alignment on expectations. Valerie can assist
by establishing a communication plan to facilitate discussions on project progress, expectations,
and critical decisions.
 Valerie's advocacy for modular sections, while not a top priority for the initial product version,
necessitates a team decision on feature prioritization. She can involve stakeholders to select and
prioritize items to meet a timely delivery of the MVP.
 Valerie's unawareness of the team's challenges can be addressed by proposing a risk
management plan (Exhibit B) for discussion during meetings. This will bring visibility to early
project development issues and adjust expectations.
 Trust issues within the team can be mitigated by establishing team norms, as illustrated in Exhibit
C. Valerie can help facilitate consensus on member roles and responsibilities.

Page 1 of 2
Exhibit A: Prioritization via Insertion Sorting

Functionality Priority Rational

Core Functionality
Regulatory Compliance
Technical Feasibility
Risk Mitigation
Competitive Advantage
Modularity
High Essential for Intenscare’s primary use.
High Critical for approvals and safety.
High Focus on achieving with existing resources.
High High-risk areas need early attention.
Medium Effectively counters competition.
Low Important but can be addressed later product versions.

Exhibit B: Risk Management Plan

Risks Severity Likelihood RPN

Missing deadlines 9 9 81
Lack of open communication 7 9 63
Hardware does not fit into customer specs. 7 8 56
Lack of special features such as modularity that
5 10 50
distinguish Medisys from competitors
Delay in software development by the India team 6 8 48

Exhibit C: Team Norms

Element Best Practices (Team Norms) Why?

Leadership  Project leader is agreed upon by all team
members.
Attendance  Project leader runs all meetings.
 Only core team members attend team
meetings.
Conflict  Step 1: Direct discussion with conflicting
Resolution team members.
 Step 2: If Step 1 does not lead to resolution,
escalate to managers. Step 2 should only be
taken if Step 1 does not accomplish the
goals.
 Step 3: Bring conflict to Project Sponsor for
resolution.
Accountability  All team members are accountable to
successes and challenges.
 No single team member can receive
recognition without recognizing the team.
 No single team member can be punished
without the team being punished.
A leader without support is not a
leader at all.
The team operates as a team.
Team members support each
other in the absence of a single
team member.
The team needs to be
transparent and honest with one
another. Trust cannot be
created without open and honest
conversation amongst the team.
The team succeeds or fails
together. The ability of one
team member to take glory or to
throw others under the bus
reduces trust and risks project
success.

Page 2 of 2