What went Right with the Project| Why|
1. Training and data transfer from the legacy systems to the new system happened with few if any problems 2. The vendor met commitments and timeliness to accommodate YA needs 3. Within a reasonable amount of time YA and the vendor was able to address functional and performance issues in the core system 4. The project was delivered on time and within budget| 1. The project manager is an experienced CIO from the Massachusetts Chapter, so he understands what suggestions to make to the vendor and how the systems work 2. The hiring of the project director made sure everything was going according to plan on a daily basis and kept the pressure on the vendor to do the job on time and effectively 3. A core team of chapters created a system user committee to oversee the long term management of the arrangement with the vendor, in case there were problems with the system 4. A combination of the project manager’s and director’s leadership, the vendors superb performance, the amount of chapters sharing the payments, and the fact that YA’s employees wanted to be there and increase their performance as a non-profit organization|
What went Wrong with the Project| Why|
1. The chapters found it hard to give up their particular agendas and unique business process practices 2. The chapters continued to layer on functionality to the core system, adding complexity and slowing down overall performance 3. Employees had difficulty learning the new system, which slowed down YA’s productivity 4. The national chapter of YA was not able to live up to commitments as the administrative keeper of the PM process 5. Chapters dropped out towards the end of the development phase raising the share of ongoing costs for the rest of the chapters 6. YA failed to assign a “system owner” for post-cutover management of the relationship between the chapters and the vendors...