What Makes a Project Unique - Assignment Example

Project Management Name: Institution: Task one Task 1.1.1 Projects entail sequential undertakings which result in creation new unique products such as developing a new designer car or constructing a bridge or planning the sixteenth birthday party. Projects are a critical tool through which organizations meet their overall organizational strategy. Every single project in an organisation has a core purpose of enhancing organisational value. There are certain features which defines all projects irrespective of size or magnitude. Projects are time bounded, have well defined goals and scope, have unique outcomes and tend to use a defined amount of resources. Whatever project is pursued, they tend to be restricted to a certain point in terms of money, time, and expertise, among other necessary resources. Task 1.1.2 What makes a project unique is its focus on delivering new products not developed before which are focused on driving organisational sustainability in attaining its overall strategy. Day to day activities such as making coffee, posting a comment on a forum , or writing a letter, have no unique role to play in an overall strategy of any entity. They are routine everyday tasks which differ from projects in terms of the uniqueness in deliverables and goals. For day to day activities, the deliverable may not be a one-time or a new thing, as is the case with a project. What makes projects unique is this very fact. In addition unlike everyday activities, what makes the project unique is that they cannot be done by just anybody. Due to the uniqueness of the products that need to be developed, each project, on its own, requires specific special skills, abilities and knowledge, all aimed to solve issues that are out of the ordinary. Task 1.1.3 From the definition, it is noted that a project needs to have a defined scope, time and budget. While this is true for most projects, in my experience, some projects seeking to develop new products have tended to shift in scope. As the product being developed goes through the various project stages, newer information and capabilities are also discovered and old ones refined in a manner that may require an expansion of the project scope or a refinement of the project goal. In other cases, involving the customer in the process increases the probability that they would make suggestions which may impact the scope of the project, or it may overstretch available resources such as time and finances. It is such occurrences that define the bulk of a project manager’s role, as he/she has to ensure compliance to set the scope and deadlines, yet flexible and keen enough to note crucial changes. Response to student’s comments A project takes into account the overall priority and strategy within an organisation into account. This is because whatever the goal of the project is, it has to add value to an organisation, enhancing the organisation’s competitive advantage in its industry. Within highly dynamic environments where goods and services are constantly changing, having quick turnaround projects is even more critical to such an organisation. This implies that a keen eye has to be put on working within the set time limits to make the project relevant. Furthermore, it is also important to work within the defined scope and budget. However, the priority in any project, often defines how time, budget and scope are managed. Those that have a high focus on time constraints may stretch the budget a little and narrow the scope of the project Task 2: Projects are a critical tool through which an organization is able to meet its overall organizational strategy. This is because projects play a crucial role in producing new unique services, products or outcomes consistent with an organization's strategy. These help in the implementation of an organization’s strategy in satisfying the needs of the consumers. Furthermore, having successful projects has the tendency of ensuring that an organization improves its competitive advantage in the market (Cohen & Graham, 2001, p.4). The plethora of projects within an organisation determines what the organisation is trying to achieve in overall. This implies that the portfolio projects in an organization from those which are still in the planning phase to those which are in the progress of implementation and those which have already been implemented consist the process and essence of strategy implementation in the organisation. Various organizations such as IBM, Chevron, and General Motors’ have a wide portfolio of projects each of which successfully link to the overall strategy of the organizations (Cohen & Graham, 2001, p. 4). This crucial link implies that the selection of a project within an organization is highly dependent on how well such project aligns with the overall organizational strategy or how well it helps the organization to attain its mission and vision (Cohen & Graham, 2001, p.8). For instance, projects that focus on developing new products which are in high demand, such as new software with new capabilities, may be expected to yield higher returns than other projects such as those which focus on expanding into a new region. Even though both can help an organization meet its strategic vision, management would most likely choose the one with a higher return value where capital budgets are constrained to pursue both (Kendrick, 2003, p.133). Furthermore, since attaining the overall project is a key goal of any organization, it is imperative that the link between the strategy and the implementation of such projects be flawless. Rylander and Peppard (2003, p. 316) argue that information flow is critical to linking strategy and implementation of the projects. This is because it enables knowledge flow from various stakeholders involved in a project, and further enhances development of intellectual capital that is well aligned with the vision of the organization. Littler et al. (2000, p. 426) further notes that such links in information flow can be strengthened through the use of such tools as the balanced scorecard. This is a performance tool which helps in evaluating the progress of how a strategy or program is being implemented. It defines the critical success factors in any implementation process which are measured through key performance measurement indexes. Estimates define the very essence of the resource that projects are supposed to attain and the constraints within which the project works in. Since resources such as finances or time tend to be limited, having good estimates of the resources that the project will use is critical for the viability of a project (Kendrick, 2003, p.137). Project that have no defined timeline or have inaccurate costs may not be favoured by management over other more viable projects with more accurate estimates. It is imperative to effectively estimate the time a project will take or how much it will cost, since the success of the project is often determined by whether it has been delivered on the estimated budget and within the given time. Lee, Keil and Kasi (2012, p.53) in comparing between project schedule and initial budget estimates on project escalation in Software development project, noted that commitment to delivering proper estimates in terms of budget and schedule reduced instances of project escalation and enhances successful completion of a project. For instance, projects which have involved highly innovative products and are also highly obsolete need to be fast and on time, otherwise the products would have no strong impact on the market. Blackstone, Cox, and Schleier (2009, p. 7030) support this noting that some of the reasons why projects have serious delays or have cost overruns that are way too costly is mainly due to ineffective estimates as a result of poor competencies and poor project management skills. These estimates as noted mainly include time to be taken to complete a project, the scope of the project as well as the costs to be incurred in the project. These estimates form the core of any project management (Kendrick, 2003). However, even as these estimates are critical, research also shows that the quality of the project outcome is one of the key determinants of the success of the project (Lee, Keil & Kasi, 2012, p.57). How the above estimates work together impacts the quality of the project. This is because a project has to meet the needs and specifications for which it is developed. Notably, quality together with the other estimates determines how a project is completed. This implies that the above estimates have to be managed and assessed within a project to make them work well together. How they are managed often highly depends on what the clients prefers most. The above three estimates which are commonly referred to as constraints work in a manner that one cannot adjust one of the estimates without impacting the others (Kendrick, 2003, p.135). For instance, a change in the scope of a project would most likely also impact both the time and the cost of the project. Where a project requires a higher quality or scope, then it implies that both finances and time would have to be spared to enable this. On the other hand, where a project needs to be completed within a short deadline, then probably cost would increase as the project would need more resources, while the scope of the project would be reduced in order to meet the required deadline. Project managers therefore need to understand how these factors change, and need to monitor the three estimates as the project progresses in order in order to better be able to understand possible problems and risks that the projects is bound to face, and how these can be avoided (Blackstone, Cox, & Schleier, 2009, p.7035). How projects are implemented within organizations however is strongly dependant on the organisation culture towards program implementation. The culture of an organisation strongly influences the management attitude towards such projects (Stare, 2011, p.3). Organizations with a slow decision making culture, or a culture where management does not favour implementation of various initiatives, may grossly impact how projects are implemented. Since the organisation culture define an organisation’s internal way of thinking or doing things, most project implementation would follow such set norms and rules within the organisation implementing projects (p. 15). Following an implementation pattern that is different from the culture may face obstacles since the people in the organisation may not have a positive attitude towards the project. For instance, the organizational culture in Yahoo before Terry Semel became CEO, was one in which different managers could freely develop their own mini projects and implement them. However, Semel sought to develop a more integrated strategic vision for the company, and hence eliminated most of the projects which were not adding value to Yahoo’s overall strategy and left those enhanced Yahoo’s new strategy as an integrated theme park (Bonamici & Vogelstein, 2005, p.40). Such changes brought with it a lot of challenges in the organisation since the people were used to implementing projects without having to present it to a strategic project committee. In essence therefore, an organizations culture sets the stage on how projects are viewed and implemented. References Blackstone, J., Cox, J., & Schleier, J., 2009. A tutorial on project management from a theory of constraints perspective. International Journal of Production Research, 47 (24), 7029-7046. Bonamici, K., & Vogelstein, F., 2005. Yahoo's Brilliant Solution. Fortune International (Europe), 152 (3), 38-45. Cohen, D.J., and Graham, R., 2001. The Project Manager's MBA: How to Translate Project Decisions into Business Success. New York; Wiley. Kendrick, T., 2003. Chapter 6: Managing Project Constraints and Documenting Risks. Identifying & Managing Project Risk, American Management Association International, pp.132-157 Lee, J., Keil, M., & Kasi, V. 2012. The Effect of an Initial Budget and Schedule Goal on Software Project Escalation. Journal of Management Information Systems, 29 (1), 53-78, Littler, K., Aistorpe, P., Hudson, R., Keasey, K., 2000. A new approach to linking strategy formulation and strategy implementation: an example from the UK banking sector,’ International Journal of Information Management, 20, 411-428. Rylander, A., and Peppard, J., 2003. From implementing strategy to embodying strategy: Linking strategy, identity and intellectual capital. Journal of Intellectual Capital, 4(3), 316 – 331. Stare, A., 2011. The Impact of the Organizational Structure and Project Organizational Culture on Project Performance in Slovenian Enterprises. Management: Journal of Contemporary Management Issues, 16 (2), 1-22 Read More