Effective and Efficient Project Management: Trophy Project Case Study
1. Problems Identified
1.1 Structural Strategy
1. No proper project structure - this made the execution and management of the project very ineffective.
2. Project over budget – The project estimated cost overrun of atleast 20%
3. Poor leadership/no leadership commitment - the customer requested the Divisional GM and his team to present the status of the project. However the DGM instructed Reichart to go with any other 3 or 4 functional managers
4. No Balanced Scorecard with critical success factors, including continuous review and appraisal processes.
5. Lack of a sufficient Guiding Coalition - no support from other functional managers
6. There is no control over functional managers - Reichart did all the work himself due to the lack of communication and the imbalance of power between the project managers and functional managers.
7. There are no policies and procedures in place - Top management failed to implement processes and policies based on programme and project management principles. This indicate a poor leadership approach
8. No proper resource allocation - Reichart did not have adequate resources(people) that could have stay at required pace or make up for the time already lost in the project management
9. There was a lack of project management in the organization - Reichart planning was in isolation not involving functional managers where their input was most needed. The project manager reported directly to the operations manager, the appointed assistant programme manager interfered by attempting to install a system that tracked problems. Focus should have been on solving the problems not finding innovative ways to track them, this organisation wasted $50,000.
10. There was a lack of governance structure or escalation procedures - Reinhardt’s first opportunity to escalate was six months into the project – only once it was behind schedule and over budget.
11. No authority for project manager - no authority over functional heads yet VP wanted to hold
1.1 Structural Strategy
1. No proper project structure - this made the execution and management of the project very ineffective.
2. Project over budget – The project estimated cost overrun of atleast 20%
3. Poor leadership/no leadership commitment - the customer requested the Divisional GM and his team to present the status of the project. However the DGM instructed Reichart to go with any other 3 or 4 functional managers
4. No Balanced Scorecard with critical success factors, including continuous review and appraisal processes.
5. Lack of a sufficient Guiding Coalition - no support from other functional managers
6. There is no control over functional managers - Reichart did all the work himself due to the lack of communication and the imbalance of power between the project managers and functional managers.
7. There are no policies and procedures in place - Top management failed to implement processes and policies based on programme and project management principles. This indicate a poor leadership approach
8. No proper resource allocation - Reichart did not have adequate resources(people) that could have stay at required pace or make up for the time already lost in the project management
9. There was a lack of project management in the organization - Reichart planning was in isolation not involving functional managers where their input was most needed. The project manager reported directly to the operations manager, the appointed assistant programme manager interfered by attempting to install a system that tracked problems. Focus should have been on solving the problems not finding innovative ways to track them, this organisation wasted $50,000.
10. There was a lack of governance structure or escalation procedures - Reinhardt’s first opportunity to escalate was six months into the project – only once it was behind schedule and over budget.
11. No authority for project manager - no authority over functional heads yet VP wanted to hold
Bibliography: 4.1. Steyn, P & Schmikl E. 2010. Programme Managing Organisational Transformation, Change and performance Improvement. 4.2. Kotter John P. “Leading Change” Harvard Business School Press 4.3. Kerzner H; A System Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Control, nineth edition. John Wiley & Son 2003 4.4. Mark Piscopo, www.ProjectManagementDocs.com