Program 4

REPORTING N°2
C E S I M P R O J E C T

Olivia Marchetti
Océane El m’barki
Mélanie Fina
Sara Zairi
The most important indicators
to take into account :
There are a many indicators to take into account when reporting,
to understand whether the decisions taken have been the right
ones or whether there is need for improvement.
Indeed, we can name :

Quality value created for customer : it means the value

we created by accomplishing the tasks for the customers, in
euros. This indicator tells us whether or not we were efficient
during the round.
In the cost incurred section, there are the costs incurred by
the working days used, the costs of overtime, the costs of
slack days and those of outsourcing. Knowing these costs
gives us a better understanding of the program and a better
way of monitoring the decisions taken during the round,
particularly to ensure that we don't exceed the budget.

Communication constraints : team members have to

speak only English, which can lead to misunderstandings.

Cost performance index : it compares the earned value to

the expenses of the project. This indicator allows us to know
if the decisions during the round (or more globally during the
project) has created more value than it has spent.

Remaining tasks : it indicates the number of tasks we still

have to complete in order to finish the programme. This
makes it easier to keep track of progress and to make better
decisions for the final rounds.

Penalty for remaining tasks : it’s a serious element to take

into account, especially for the last round.

Program 4
 Our analysis of the results in
the context of our strategies :

In the first round, we opted for the strategy of not using a lot
of overtime, especially for the team members with the highest
overtime cost €/workday, so as not to exceed the budget. The
results of round 1 made us realise that this wasn't the right
strategy to adopt, as it would make it difficult for us to finish
the remaining tasks and therefore, the program in the final
round.
So, to make up for this, we decided to use more overtime and
outsourcing in round 2. The results of round 2 show that this
new strategy is the right one to adopt, as it will enable us to
catch up for the following rounds.
Secondly, during these two rounds, our strategy was to focus on
tasks that created quality value for the customer. Our results
show that we were right to focus on tasks that created more
value for the customer, because we multiplied by 9 (from
24,500€ to 224,000€) the quality value created for the
customer between round 1 and 2.

Program 4
 Our strengths during the
round n°2 :

The number of tasks we achieved in relation to the

workdays and overtime. Indeed, we achieved 39 tasks during
round 2, with only 269 working days (including 47 days of
overtime).

Our relative efficiency of 1.31 indicates successful task

allocation that means that the tasks were achieved in less
time than expected by a team member with average skills.

The quality value created for the customer is 224,000

euros. We improved this massively in the second round,
because in the first round the quality value created for the
customer was only 24,500 euros.

Out of the costs incurred, we only had €935 of slackdays,

which means that we managed to make good use of each
member to avoid having additional costs in the budget.

Our completion rate : 57.3 over the 2 rounds

Program 4
Our weak points during the
round n°2 :
Our lack of understanding of the simulation during the first
round 1, which led to poor decision-making, in particular not
using more overtime to finish the tasks in the program.
And which, as a result, led to a large number of remaining
tasks in round 2 (83) that we need to complete in just two
remaining rounds.

Our cost performance index of 77% which means that

we're only performing at 77% of the planned expectations
during this round.

We have too many tasks that are blocked because of the

dependency of other members’ tasks, which could cause us
a problem at the end of the last round.

Program 4
 What do we need to
improve ?
For the next 2 round, we need to improve our number
of tasks completed, in order to finish the program
and, consequently, our completion level.
To do this, we need to use as many workdays or
overtime as possible, while avoiding slack days and
staying within budget.
We also need to improve our cost performance
index, which must be over 100% because it indicates
that the project has created more value than it has
spent. Our cost performance index is currently at 77%
which is way to low.
And, more broadly, our ranking in relation to other
programs (groups).

Program 4
 The main differences
between the 4 projects :

Among the 4 team members, there are differences in the way

decisions are taken, even if the strategies adopted remain
essentially the same (as we saw in question 2). The differences
in this second round were as such :

Overtime workdays : the payment team has more overtime

costs (16,225€ for 22.8 hours) than the other teams, where
the average is 4,919€ for around 8 hours of overtime.

Slack Days : the Digitizing and Internal teams have the

same number of slack days (1 day) but do not have the same
budget costs. The Digitizing team has a budget cost of
256€, compared with 136€ for the Internal team.

Outsourcing : the Digitizing team is the only team not to

have outsourced its tasks during this round, unlike the 3 other
teams who have high outsourcing costs at an average of
9000€.
Overall Quality : Internal and Customer teams have an
average of 43,2% unlike Digitizing and Payment which have
an average of 3,55%.

Program 4
 What can explain
those differences ?
All these differences between the 4 teams that we have just
highlighted can be explained by the fact that :

In round 2, the payment team had decided to rely heavily

on overtime, in order to finish and bring forward as many
tasks as possible, particularly those on which the other
teams depended.

The Digitizing team did not have the opportunity to take

advantage of outsourcing during this round, as the tasks it
was offered to outsource were blocked by the progress of
the other teams' tasks.

During this round, the Digitizing and Payment teams had a

much lower overall quality percentage than the other 2
teams because their tasks, which created value for the
customer, were blocked by tasks belonging to the other
teams.

Program 4
Results of round n°2

Program 4