• essayintl.com >
  • Case Study >
  • Brighton Bypass Project, Tasmania - Management of Project, SWOT Analysis, and Critical Analysis of Project Outcome

Essays on Brighton Bypass Project, Tasmania - Management of Project, SWOT Analysis, and Critical Analysis of Project Outcome Case Study

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing

The paper “ Brighton Bypass Project, Tasmania - Management of Project, SWOT Analysis, and   Critical Analysis of Project Outcome”   is an apposite example of a case study on the management. Historically, the Brighton Bypass Project in Hobart Tasmania is the largest road infrastructure project. With the construction of northern and southern sections, two joint ventures were selected to construct each location involving participants from the Government Department of Infrastructure, energy, and resource department. In addition, the participants were to develop the scope of the project, preliminary design, and cost estimates (Thiess 2013).

The project construction began in 2009 and was completed in 2012 with 1800 employees in which the entire project cost was $ 191 million with Australian Government funding $ 186.2 million and the rest from donors (Thiess 2013). Objectives were to reduce the time travel between the highway street of Hobart and Launceston (Pitt & Sherry 2011). Improving safety, amenity, and efficiency of Midland highway, Township of Brighton and Portville as the most dangerous and worn-out roads were among its objectives (DIER 2012). In addition, the project objective advocates safer and convenient movement of general traffic and freight from the northern and southern sides of the country. The scope of the project outlined the construction of dual carriageway highway, separated interchanges of three-level grade, the efficient crossing of Jordan River and minor waterways, construction of underpass and overpass of roads, service roads, realignment of secondary roads, mainline railway and ramps. 2.0 Stakeholder’ s AnalysisStakeholders influence the success or the failure of the project.

The success of the project is realized through phase implementation and feedbacks from various stakeholders. The project success was linked through the involvement of major stakeholders like TGDIER, VEC Thiess JV & JHHB, and Local Aboriginal Community.

TGDIER's main agenda was to confirm the business needs and initiate the project. In addition, its role was to provide data for Midland highway, which include travel destination, the volume of vehicles and crashes recorded. The report gathered by TGDIER strongly advocates for the construction of the Brighton bypass project. The VEC Thiess JV & JHHB are two ventures involved in the management and construction of both sections of the project with each involved in designing and constructing 6.5 km of dual carriageway in the northern section and construction of 3.4 km road and 6km new railway with maintenance facilities respectively (DIER 2012).

With the availability of limited skills, Thiess employed a new skill by a mix of teams both the experienced workers and the newcomers to industries. The local aboriginal community protested during the evacuation of stone artifacts with the committee continual with construction. The protest resulted in the top of the project and the redesigning to protect the interest of the community though it proved to be unsafe and too costly.

They involved stakeholders were able to work together after undergoing intensive training hence having the ability to recognize all involved companies' strengths. The proposal of the stakeholder’ s consultation strategy in the project analysis report assisted in managing emerging issues like a gathering of information to be submitted to stakeholders, good communication that will maintain a positive relationship between stakeholders due to the scale of the project. The strategy ensures coordination between stakeholders. In addition stakeholders, engagement plan was designed to engage actively the involved community in the project, minimize arise from disruption and inconveniences within the community and stakeholders to curb hold-ups to the construction of the project.

Active involvement of the community to the project was among the stakeholders' management team. The community members were encouraged to share ideas through websites, posters in local areas, newspaper advertisements, and public display of information to be viewed by a special committee (See Appendix).

Download full paperFile format: .doc, available for editing
Contact Us