Critical Factors
*A change in the project specifications after the freeze date was agreed up on in the contract. These changes created a domino effect of problems. This was in violation of the contract with BAE which stated there would be a number of freeze dates for mechanical design, software design, and permanent power.
*A lack of efficient and effective communication between the city, project management team, and consultants. This manifests itself in basic issues like vendors blocking roadways for other vendors, the city canceling orders for electrical filtering components that were critical path, and too many unilateral decision made because "no one was in charge".
*A late start with respect to deciding the type of technology to be
…show more content…
The types of technology required for a system this large should have been made much earlier in the facility design process. Delaying this decision resulted in several instances of rebuilding facilities to support more weight, provide more ventilation, and larger payload handling.
*This was a build/design project. The idea of making design decisions after construction was underway is an recipe for catastrophe in a project of this magnitude. The city's insistence that this be held to a tight schedule yet allowing multiple design changes was unfortunate. There were too many players, lots of pressure, and the whole project was run by committee with differing agendas. The project administrators had to balance administrative, political, and social imperatives.
*the City's requirements that a percentage of the project be done by local and minority talent hamstrung BAE to deliver. They were forced to hire subcontractors resulting in longer times and higher costs.
*The change tracking system took over three years to implement due to the need to make differing technologies play well together and the low priority placed on this by the vendors.
*The city invited reporters to preview the first test of the baggage handling system without notifying the vendor. This became a public relations nightmare and added public resentment to the list of problems facing the delivery
Bombardier quickly realized that their aggressive acquisition strategy had become a much more expensive endeavor. By creating a silo environment, they created inefficiencies throughout the entire supply chain. Systems did not communicate, creating process delays, low inventory turnovers, price inconsistencies, and multiple bills of materials. They also had to hire personal to maintain multiple legacy systems.
• What mistakes happen during the designing project/mobilization phases? How did these mistakes impact the first 6 weeks of the project? Why is Chen finding the situation so difficult?
Eight months into the project, our contact at C-S, Mr. Leon Thur, was not pleased with the product
1. Why don’t information systems projects work out as planned? What causes the differences between the plan and reality?
There were several obstacles that had the potential to impact the scope, time, and the cost of the PWP. According to Schwalbe (2011), “Managing the triple constraint involves making trade-offs between scope, time, and cost goals for a project” (p. 8). The PWP required over 400 owner-acquired and overseeing permits. Any delay in obtaining a permit would cause the time schedule to slip. This massive project required
While many opinions were delivered about the progress of the junction redevelopment throughout the Oct. 25 City Council meeting, among the most prominent concerns expressed was the lack of control the
It might sound unbelievable, but the project managed to change the contractors’ minds – to build the MRT around the
Utilizing public funds to invest in megaprojects has been a contentious topic for many cities who are tempted to endure years, if not decades, of construction and billions of dollars of debt to hopefully experience some economic and social advantages that other megaprojects have brought to fortunate cities and areas. However, from studies and research, it seems that megaprojects have higher likeliness to fail and bring economic turmoil to cities and areas that take the risk. Unless protocol for how such projects and associated contractors are held accountable improve, using public resources to fund megaprojects should cease. Too often does it occur that the burden of megaprojects falls on taxpayers where such funding could have been used for
Although the initiation of the contract, work breakdown structure, and the total outlines was created, stated clearly and effectively the project still turned out incredibly way outside of scope and cost as it was predicted early on in the project. These delaying and costly factors were caused not by the use of project management, rather a malpractice of it. One of the biggest contributing factors of delay and ever increasing expenses was, the production of the final product before a successful first test flight. Meaning Lockheed Martin, did not follow the set outlines it created for itself and jumped to the finish line by starting final production of the aircraft before working out all of the flaws that were currently present. This meant that the United States government would receive a faulty and unfinished product. Along with several other contributing factors such as engineering issues, poor staffing, and software
According to Luth (2000) there were many opportunities throughout the construction and design phase for the design flaw to be recognized by the engineers and there should have been a better review system in place as the changes that were made were not properly reviewed by a structural engineer. This disaster could have been avoided if someone would have taken the time to make sure all the designs were safe and would work
Shared leadership between city of Denver & Consultant team created many inefficiencies, duplicate work and lack of real ownership. Additionally no organizational structure change at DIA was ever made to accommodate this new baggage system project. Further complicating the matter was the communication channels and roles between city, PMT and consultants were not defined or controlled. All were working in silos.
The deficiency includes procurement, inventory system that includes warehouse operations and critical parts. Project lead time from inception to execution could take as long as two years. Repair of equipment, including critical equipment, is unnecessarily delayed due to lack of spare parts on hand. This needs to be looked very closely to make sure we do not repeat the same mistake in the contract that is being rewritten.
The Trophy Project was fundamentally mismanaged from the start. The management functions of planning, organizing, staffing, controlling and directing personnel and resources were poorly executed by both senior and project level management. Customer expectations were not well defined and scope creep was allowed to take place without proper administration. There did not appear to be a corporate champion for this project who could mentor and resolve conflicts that were beyond the authority of the project manager. Plus, the project manager appeared to be inexperienced and was not very adept at negotiating with upper level and functional management to obtain the proper resources necessary to achieve the project
A substantial majority of projects in the United States construction industry fail to meet their cost and schedule objectives, in line with Construction Industry Institute (CII) research.
Because the Home office failed to objectively define detailed scopes, controlling of the scope became very difficult. “the Department has little clear idea of how it expects business processes to change.” [2]. And the fact that the Home office has little knowledge of managing changes did not help. Proper change control procedure mentioned before had no signs of appearing throughout the project. However, because there was no scope baseline from the Department, requirements inevitably needed to be growing and shifting all the time. As the result of this, the Home office would think Raytheon’s work unsuccessful, while Raytheon would find that it was the requirements change that hindered their processes.