CIMECT Case Study
1. Discuss Pam Kincaid’s primary structural issues in the CIMECT Project. Based on the structural issues you identified, make a set of recommendations for a course of action that she might pursue to alleviate the structural issues.
Many structural issues within the CIMECT Project currently threaten the success of the project and require the attention of Pam Kincaid, the project manager. At the annual board meeting, company president Jerry Jenkins identified several issues that directly affect the CIMECT project. Mr. Jenkins’ address clearly stated that the priority of research and development efforts would be “maintaining the existing Market share for aircraft controls and increasing the market share and products for military aircraft controls.” Also, the focus of new product development would be the Pythagoras project, which has the potential of resulting in a $2.2 Billion contract over 3-5 years. Both of these statements are significant to Pam Kincaid because both areas impact her project and have the potential to limit resources she needs to complete CIMECT. This threat has been further identified by memorandums she received from Reliability Engineering and Manufacturing Engineering which both stated Pythagoras threatens their ability to complete work on CIMECT. More importantly, the CIMECT project does not directly contribute to any of the strategic focus areas identified by Mr. Jenkins and will likely suffer as a result.
The company has recently restructured to a matrix arrangement in order to meet upcoming challenges. The goal of the change was to enable “functional divisions to maintain and integrate essential skills to be available to projects.” It is clear that the changes have not been effectively implemented based on the interactions within the CIMECT project. Both the company focus issue and organizational restructuring issue have been generated external to the project; however, both have the ability to significantly impact performance of the CIMECT team.
Within CIMECT, two related structural issues severely threaten the success of the project: change management and communications. There are many examples within the memorandums received by Pam that indicate divisions are all making changes to the project without consulting other division or seeking authorization to make the change. Examples include, but are not limited to: an informal test plan, incorporating customer suggested enhancements, hardware changes, customer interface, design changes, and material approval limits. Furthermore, the changes are not being relayed to other divisions after implementation. The impact is that divisions are behind with planning to accommodate the change and additional changes are required by other divisions to comply with the new design. These changes clearly indicate that communications within the project are severely deficient and that Pam, as project manager, does not have control of the project. Individual functional mangers are in charge of their own areas and do not feel subordinate to Pam.
Contributing to the problems internal to the project, the assignment of a customer representative further complicates the situation. The concerns expressed by the customer are valid, and a customer representative may be appropriate in this situation, however, a specific plan should be developed to incorporate the representative with regard to who should interact with the representative and who is authorized to make changes suggested by the representative. So far, the impact of having the customer representative is the schedule has been delayed to make changes and costs have increased associated with the changes. The specific role of the customer representative within the CIMECT development team must be identified and agreed upon by the customer and Sieron employees.
The priority for resolving the structural issues should be to ensure the CIMECT project will continue to receive funding and...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document