The Downfalls Of Project Scope Management

2444 Words 10 Pages
Register to read the introduction… Fulfilling this Knowledge Area ensures that the project manager has an understanding of all the work or tasks the project entails. It can be further refined by having other opinions of the task lists from a quantifiable description of the project. Knowing most of the tasks at an early stage usually highlights and triggers changes that would need to be made before resources are wasted on them. One of the downfalls of the project is the Top Down approach when considering workloads. The DPA’s IT Support Manager underestimated the tasks associated with developing the software systems. The two consultants were still reporting directly to him, even though he had no experience in this field and might not have been able to steer the project successfully. Taz and Jeremy should have been more instrumental together with the IT support manager in assessing the work loads. There was no project plan or scope formulated by the project director or the IT consultants because the project director assumed that Jeremy formulated it and Jeremy was of the opinion that he did not need to have an official plan, but a plan in his mind was sufficient. Having taken this approach, Jeremy’s plan was not exposed to the team for constructive criticism and the element of human error was encouraged. Early formal definition of a project scope is a very effective technique of ensuring that projects run …show more content…
Sequencing tasks based on individual task duration, ability of tasks to run concurrent with other tasks, predecessors of tasks, strategic scheduling and controlling of tasks are all elements that need to be considered when managing time in any project. A Proactive approach for time allocation – “working on plans that are beyond the timeframe of ‘that which needs to be done immediately’ with the emphasis on ‘problem prevention’ ( Harvey Maylor 4th Edition pg 270). This approach on time management is designed to save time in the initiating stages of any project. Without considering a task list or any form of initial planning the DPA and Regional Sales Centers deemed an arbitrary project duration of 3 to 4 months. Additionally the Project Director nominated by the head of the DPA only worked 2 days / week on the project and had a significant amount of persons reporting to him. This type of work schedule creates disconnects and loss of focus. Considering the criticality of the project, a fully committed Project Director may have been a wiser choice. Breakdown structures should have been initially employed to allow for better control of tasks and containment of risk. Implementing Organization Breakdown Structure techniques coupled with Work Breakdown Structure “Chunking” (Lecturer’s Notes), would have highlighted possible continuity issues such as Jeremy and Taz not being able to meet the “go live” date due to the underestimation of the quantity of work to be done on the

Related Documents