Week 7

Reassessment and Adjustment

Name:

Institutional Affiliation:

Date:

Reassessment and Adjustment

At this stage of reassessment and adjustment of solution, the project needs to be analyzed keenly in order to restructure the process. This reassessment is carried out in order to ensure that the objectives of the project are met within the timelines given and with the utilization of not more than the resources allocated. In this project, we categorically modify our project using a reassessment tool that identifies risk and the reassessment includes four main stages, cost analysis, optimization, the delegation of roles and retention. These steps will bring change to the way the project is being managed and carried out. Change is inevitable (Tomanek et.al., 2015).

The solution on reassessment needs to be modified to fit a new timeline that will be both feasible, realistic and cost-effective. This can be achieved by setting clear phases that outline what needs to be done and at what phase. When a solution is carried out haphazardly, the resultant outcomes tend to be disorderly. In ken of these facts, major changes need to be done in the schedule so as to bring out best results (Bowen, 2018).

In order to implement solutions, we are required to state clearly the deadlines that need to be met by the various parties that play in the carrying out of this implementation. This change is the most important move towards achieving success in this case. Time virtually binds every aspect of the solution. In a case of the SMART strategy, the T stands for time bound. It is like the summary of the other four concepts. If we set timelines to be optimum, we will make the implementation to be realistic, limited and achievable (Nachreiner et.al., 2015).

Another change that must be undertaken in the implementation of this solution is the reassignment of roles. This can be achieved through an increase in the number of staff and delegation of tasks. Interdepartmental collaboration is a very important way to make work easier. Change in how duties are divided among departments need to take place. A task should be seen as a responsibility of every member and not that of just a few (Tomanek et.al., 2015). Therefore, we should encourage collective responsibility. This is in line with Adam Kreek’s idea of collaborative working in his concept of CLEAR strategies to success.

When we do cost analysis, a hike in the intended expenditure indicates that we need to cut on the cost. This can be done using various methods that will bring a change to the solution implementation. We can reduce the time taken to complete a task through the employment of more staff, most preferably qualified professionals, so as to lessen the work per person per day. We can also reduce cost by classifying tasks and carrying them out in categories. This ensures that tasks in the same bracket are completed on the same day or within a fixed timeline thus saving on time wasted if this is done in a disorganized manner. Lastly, we can cut costs by reusing reusable materials instead of throwing them away. Change aimed in this direction is meant to benefit any projects to be implemented (Nachreiner et.al., 2015).

Actions that lead to major changes in implementation should be carried out in a step by step fashion keeping in mind that if done in one scoop can bring the project into a nosedive situation. Therefore, changes can be slated for in phases to set it in a transition towards a best fitting yet gradual manner (Bowen, 2018).

When it comes to ensuring that the implementation was done correctly, a follow-up must be done so as to access the success achieved. The management and the financing body should carry out follow-up and advise the staff on the way forward based on what is achieved so far and the financial implication (Viana et.al., 2016).

References

Bowen, J. (2018). Moving targets: Rethinking anarchist strategies. In Changing anarchism. Manchester University Press.

Nachreiner, M., Mack, B., Matthies, E., & Tampe-Mai, K. (2015). Analysis of smart metering information systems: a psychological model of self-regulated behavioral change. Energy research & social science, 9, 85-97.

Tomanek, M., & Juricek, J. (2015). Project risk management model based on PRINCE2 and SCRUM frameworks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1502.03595.

Viana, J. C., & Mota, C. M. D. M. (2016). Enhancing Organizational Project Management Maturity: a framework based on the value-focused thinking model. Production, 26(2), 313-329.