Summary: Hueblein Inc, is a major developer, manufacturer, and marketer of consumer foods and beverage products both domestically and internationally. The corporation ran with a 10 step “capital project process” which oversaw different projects within the organization. However, this system that was put in place was not effective, so they needed to implement another process called project management and control systems aka, (PM&C). “Heublein Inc. did not want to implement a project management system that was already in place in another organization or a basic template for project management. They wanted a project management system that reflected the diversity of their business” (Mantel & Meredith, 2012, pp. 269). The company decided to hire
…show more content…
The project plan differed in comparison to the project charter in the fact that the project charter includes risk management plans and evaluation methods, as the Project plan includes milestones and schedule subdivisions.
How did their WBS differ from that described in the chapter? How did their accountability matrix …show more content…
Heublein’s WBS assigned each element a hierarchical indented numbering system and the WBS from the chapter was presented in the form of a tree as well as a textual memorandum.The WBS from the chapter showed an outline with the top organizational tasks on the left hand side and different successive levels appropriately indented. Heublein’s accountability matrix was different from that of the one in the chapter, because the Task Code was not listed. Also the accountability matrix combined the ability to initiate/responsibility with just one code, however, the RACI gave two separate codes.
Compare this project with the Project Portfolio Process in the reading for chapter 2. Was it successful?
While comparing the Heublein project with the PPP in the reading, I would deem the project a success. A plan was devised and executed seamlessly. They worked on creating a plan for the replacement of the Capital Project Progress. They ended up creating the PM&C system. The team from Heublein implemented an evaluation phase into the PM&C system. They received feedback a year later and the value of the system, according to the chapter has been “immeasurable” “Since its inception, fifteen new products have gone through the sequence” (Mantel & Meredith, 2012, p 276).
What was wrong with the previous
The project plan differed in comparison to the project charter in the fact that the project charter includes risk management plans and evaluation methods, as the Project plan includes milestones and schedule subdivisions.
How did their WBS differ from that described in the chapter? How did their accountability matrix …show more content…
Heublein’s WBS assigned each element a hierarchical indented numbering system and the WBS from the chapter was presented in the form of a tree as well as a textual memorandum.The WBS from the chapter showed an outline with the top organizational tasks on the left hand side and different successive levels appropriately indented. Heublein’s accountability matrix was different from that of the one in the chapter, because the Task Code was not listed. Also the accountability matrix combined the ability to initiate/responsibility with just one code, however, the RACI gave two separate codes.
Compare this project with the Project Portfolio Process in the reading for chapter 2. Was it successful?
While comparing the Heublein project with the PPP in the reading, I would deem the project a success. A plan was devised and executed seamlessly. They worked on creating a plan for the replacement of the Capital Project Progress. They ended up creating the PM&C system. The team from Heublein implemented an evaluation phase into the PM&C system. They received feedback a year later and the value of the system, according to the chapter has been “immeasurable” “Since its inception, fifteen new products have gone through the sequence” (Mantel & Meredith, 2012, p 276).
What was wrong with the previous