INFS6030 Project Management in Practice
Group Assignment 1
Submitted: 8th April 2013
Table of Contents
The scope of the CMR project has never been clearly defined and documented. This has resulted in various changes initiated and implemented during the project execution, which are to realign the project scope with the user and industrial requirements. However, they were never resolved to their satisfaction. To mitigate this, Customs could utilize PMBOK to breakdown the scope management to proper plan and define the scope for the CMR project, which they have been trying to do after the project kickoff, e.g.: actively engage industry and resolve the concerns and issues from industry.
Additionally, Customs has failed to provide strategy to verify the outcomes and milestones achieved by the project. This has resulted in no proper testing plan, methodology and execution against the project and its releases. This could be mitigated by developing scope verification process during the scope management via setting up corresponding acceptance KPIs.
In the end, Customs has failed to do the project scope control, which led to its overrun of budget and prolonged project duration. This severely impacts the time and cost management.
Given the wide scope and the complexity of the project, the deadline of the implementation of ICS was 10 July 2003, and 12 October 2005 for CMR was unrealistic. Therefore, potential delays of the project was foreseeable and time buffers in this case, was necessary as the quality and functionality of this project is crucial to the Customs’ operations, otherwise the scope of the project should be adjusted to fit in the timeframe.
The Customs should also estimate the activity resources and activity duration as accurate as possible since finishing on time was important under new political environment. The EDS was clearly incapable of undertaking such a complex project development. In fact, both Customs and EDS agreed that EDS should only be continuing manage the infrastructure, desktop and data aspects in October 2001.
The Customs also should continuously monitor and control the schedule against severe changes and delays instead of having EDS work on this project “under existing outsourcing arrangement” for nearly 4 years, then realized that they were running out of time and rush into implementation releases just 1 year after the Consortium, IBM and SecureNet taking over the development of the project. They even did not have enough time for system testing. All these eventually contribute to the poor quality and functionality.
Many factors including insufficient time, lack of communication and chaotic integration have contributed to the poor quality. However, the key reasons were the poor quality assurance, lack of quality control, and unexamined contractor’s readiness and capability. Additionally, the monitor responsibility of the Customs regarding contactors’ performance and the quality of inputs was also a main factor created under standard quality.
The Custom overemphasized on the expected level of functions and ignored the constraint among the scope, quality, and the time.
They should take into account the industry satisfaction, in this case they did consult the industry but they didn’t “buy in”. The CMR therefore did not create value that can fit in and satisfy the requirements of the industry.
Continuous improvements should be performed instead of last minute changes. Any defection should be detected and recognized early in the execution stage, the costs of repairing and redo, and the “data fix” thus can be saved, and necessary changes and improvements should be requested and carried out with approval. Cost Management
The cost of the project was initially estimated as $30 million, and then...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document