Discussions

Week 2 discussion

You have been hired to lead a project (for example, a relocation of a corporate HQ office), similar to this project, Reliving the past with Marriott deal.

As the project manager, you know it is important to get the project off to a good start. You are working with your project sponsor to decide on the optimal project management structure for this project. You are confident that either a dedicated project team structure or a matrix structure will work for the project, but the project sponsor thinks either will fail. Describe how you will reassure the project sponsor that either structure will be successful. Explain the pros and cons of each structure and how they support a large project.

Be sure to respond to your classmates post below:

Hello Everyone,

I certainly think that either structure will be successful as both have advantages and disadvantages.  Starting with the project structure advantage which is that project managers have more control over the team and teams have a strong sense of identity. It is the easiest structure to create a strong team culture.  While the disadvantage includes possibly removing people from their functional jobs.   Also, the dedicated teams suck up resources to work on just one thing. They can limit the number of projects the company can do at any one time, especially when different projects require the same skills.

While in the Matrix structure the resources are shared across both functional and project work which means having two managers. This structure splits power and authority between the functional or division team manager and the project manager. we'll need to use lots of negotiating skills to gain support which is one of the main disadvantages.  However, in the meantime, teams can work on lots of different things, sometimes in parallel—although this point can be argued as a disadvantage as well. 

Overall using either or would work depending on how we wish to utilize our resources. 

Adel

Discussion Week 3

You have now completed the charter for your office relocation project. The project sponsor wants to expand the scope of the project, but you are hesitant to do so per the constraints in place. One reason the sponsor is looking to expand the scope is because of a financial incentive for him. Discuss why increasing the scope of this project is not a good idea (scope creep). If you must increase the scope, what additional considerations (for example, costs or timeline) must be given to accomplish this scope change? What procedures and forms must be used to do it properly?

Be sure to respond to at least one of your classmates’ posts.

Hello All

Increasing the scope isn't a good idea because it can lead to inefficiencies ultimately causing cost overrun, negative impacts to project initiatives, resulting in not being able to meet project deliverables. 

If increasing the scope is a must, if properly managed, could lead to opportunities for the organization. As long as a clear objective is addressed and guiding measures are put into place, the project can still meet it's deadline and all of it's objectives. Clear communication with all team members whether internal or external would be crucial in the success of the project. In the same breathe, being flexible and able to accomodate your sponsor's request can show that your organization is strong and capable of handling such changes. This is where cost versus benefit comes into play. 

A change form/ document would definitely need to be done so that the guidelines are listed and agreed upon by all parties involved. This way, there's no room for assumption if something doesn't go according to plan. Because the document would include all information pertinent to the project like cost, timing, resources, etc. And make sure the document is signed by all parties involved. Be sure every department/ team working on the project is aware of the change as well as cost impacts and move forward with the project.  

krystal