Scenario Case Study Sustainability

Question: Discuss about the Scenario Case Study Sustainability. Answer: Introduction The business case and the final report of the ECHR project was included in the course study: scenarios based on the project were considered, so as to make effective management decisions, in week 1to week 6. The said assignments required us to make role based decisions: the management decisions taken up in week 1 and 2 were from the perspective of an advisor or consultant to the Federal Government, those made in week 3 and 4 were taken from the perspective of the Strategic Planning Manager of the entire project and the made in week 5 and 6 were based on the responsibilities of the Engineering Delivery Manager. The primary objective of this report is to elaborate and justify the decisions that were made in weeks 1 through 6: the decisions being made for the effective management of the entire project. Since the solutions of the assignments of week 1 to 6 are available in the open student forum, the decisions made by two other students would also be included in the report: along a critical analysis of the decisions that they have taken. Last but not the least, the lessons learnt from the case study would be enlisted, besides recommending the project manger of the ECHSR with strategies for managing the project in much more efficient manner. Elaboration of weekly posts In this section of the report, the weekly posts published on the student forum would be elaborated, besides providing a justification of the decisions made. Elaboration of post made in week 1 In the very first week of the course work, we were advised to consider the role of a consultant or advisor to the Government of Australia and identify the major stakeholders associated with the project, along with their possible roles and interests in the project. The identification of the following stakeholders was possible in week 1: 1. The Australian government (Burke 2013). 2. The indigenous community residing in the east coast of the Australia 3. The organizations that run other modes of transport (like that of air lines, buses etc) in the said region. 4. The individuals or organizations who own land in the said area (Cameron and Green 2015). It was observed that the project is being initiated and funded by the government of Australia, thus the government has been considered to be interested in the project from all respects: be it power, urgenc or legitimacy. The indigenous community residing in the east coast of the Australia indeed holds the right of defying the project proposed by the government. On the other hand, although they are less likely to be worried about the legal requirements of the project, they would indeed be interested the scheduled completion of the project (Carstens, Richardson and Smith 2013). In a very similar manner, the organizations that run other modes of transport in the east coast of Australia have been considered to be interested only in the urgency of the project, besides being capable of influencing the project to certain extent: the very same goes for the land or property owners of the region. Elaboration of post made in week 2 In the second week, the frameworks discussed in the course were to be reviewed and recommendations were to be made to the project manager from the perspective of the advisor to the Government of Australia. Thus, it was decided that the railway project being developed in the east coast of Australia would also serve the international airport being set up at Goulburn (Fowler, Lindahl and Skld 2015). It was also decided that since the scope of the project had now been amended, the identification of the stakeholders associated with the project, along with the identification of their interests in the said project would indeed be done. Besides this, the government of Australia was also recommended to conduct researches on the existing modes of transportation and the geographical conditions of the area, so as to identify any alternative mode of transportation that could be set up in the said region (Fowler, Lindahl and Skld 2015). Elaboration of post made in week 3 In the third week of the course, we were required participate the development of a concept development process, while considering the role of the Strategic Planning Manager of the ECHSR project. The following decisions were made in this section: 1. It was decided that research works need to be conducted on the existing infrastructure of the region and the technological tools available for conducting the project (Igartua, Errasti and Ganzarain 2014). 2. An assessment of the stakeholders associated with the project, along with the identification of their interests in the project. 3. The development of the rural regions of the east coast of Australia would also be required for optimizing the benefit of the project (Joslin and Mller 2015). Besides the above mentioned decisions, strategies were also developed so as to conduct an in-depth research on the resources and technologies available for conducting the project, along with the budgetary requirements of the project. Elaboration of post made in week 4 The assignment and case scenario provided in the fourth week of the course work required us to play the role of the Strategic Planning Manager of the ECHSR project and develop a clear top level specification of the project. The following decisions were taken in this week of the course work: The magnetic levitation technology or the Maglev would be utilized for reducing the carbon usage of the product in a significant manner (Karaman and Kurt 2015). The technical feasibility of the project would be assessed using the SOHO tool. In the planning phase of the project, the guidelines for receiving sustainable outcomes would have to be utilized ( needless to say, after initial analysis of the said process) (Kerzner 2013) It was also observed that the activities of the project delivery stage (as mentioned in the project report) need to be analyzed and updated so as to obtain sustainable outcomes from the said project. Elaboration of post made in week 5 The assignment and case scenario provided in week 5 required us to consider the project from the perspective of the Engineering Delivery Manager and generate a delivery process that would essentially ensure sustainable outcomes from the project, besides developing detailed designs from the conceptual designs of the project. With the above task specifications in mind, the following decisions were taken in this phase of the course work: 1. It was decided that it was the responsibility of the planning manager to develop SMART plans that can be easily understood by the rest of the project team (Leach 2014). 2. It was also decided that the task of identifying any unforeseen issues (or conflicts among the stakeholders of the project) associated with the project require to be conducted by the planning manager only. 3. The course plan for including any improvement or tangible change in the project was also developed in this week: the planning manager would have to identify the most suitable route for incorporating the change. It is after the identification of the said route that detailed planning required for the incorporation of the said changes can be made (Mathur, Jugdev and Shing Fung 2013). Elaboration of post made in week 6 In the sixth week of the course work, we were instructed to take up the role of the Engineering Delivery Manager, and identify the issues that might be experienced while managing the team associated with the project. After conducting a thorough research work in the said domain, the following issues were identified which might affect the task of commissioning the teams (needle to say, thus affecting the entire construction process): 1. The project team might eventually not be able to adhere by all the contracts that have been signed with all the contractors, subcontractors and suppliers of the project (Phillips 2013). 2.The project team might not be able to cater to all the change or improvements requested by the stakeholder associated with the project. 3. Any construction project requires to be adhered to the local building or construction laws or regulations: thus, there remain chance that the project being discussed in this report might not actually adhere to the above mentioned compliances, resulting in the failure of the project (Pritchard and PMP 2014). The strategies that are necessary for developing such a work culture in the project team, such that the team members are capable of achieving a sustainable future have also been developed in this week: the following section of the report provides a detailed description of the said strategies: 1. Such goals need to be assigned to the project team which eventually would lead to the sustainability of the entire team (Rao 2012). 2. The project manager should be able to communicate it to the team members that team work would be one of the most sought after characteristics for working in this particular project. 3. Along with the above mentioned strategies, an informal relationship among the members of the project team would also help the mission of the Engineering Delivery Manage (Schwalbe 2015). Critical evaluation of the decision made by other students In this section of the report, the decisions made by the other students would be analyzed critically. Decisions taken by Nadine Tilley and Daniel Nguyen: a critique Critique of post made in week 1 In the very first assignment, Tilley had not only identified the various stakeholders associated with the project, but have also classified them on the basis of their participation in the project. However, the interest-power grid of the stakeholders has not been motioned. Critique of post made in week 2 The government has been advised to consider the existing transportation systems for serving the new airport: the consideration of the railway system being designed in serving the airport has not been mentioned. A complete description of all frameworks has been made. Critique of post made in week 3 Several possible compromises along with their probable outcomes have been mentioned. Critique of post made in week 4 The changes to be developed in the top level of the project have been discussed in details. Critique of post made in week 5 The roles and responsibility of the Engineering Delivery Manager has been described, along with the identification of the issues that might be experienced by the project team, along with the initiatives of that need to be taken by the Engineering Delivery Manager. Critique of post made in week 6 The issues that might be experienced while commissioning the team has been provided, along with strategies for developing the work culture of the team has been provided. Decisions taken by Daniel Nguyen: a critique Critique of post made in week 1 The stake holders of the project have been identified, along with the identification of their interest and roles in the project. The utilization of the salience matrix has guaranteed (Turner 2014) the accuracy of the task. The classification of the stakeholders has been done, besides familiarizing with the Phase 1 of the given case study. Critique of post made in week 2 The frame works defined in the course work have not been discussed in details, along with the identification of the relevant framework suitable for the project in consideration. Critique of post made in week 3 Only the following strategies have been identified: 1. A Five-level hierarchy framework would be utilized for the designing the concept development process. 2. Identification of the other stakeholders. 3. Conducting the Feasibility study of the project. Critique of post made in week 4 Only the following strategy has been identified: Considering the maintenance costs and the cost of infrastructure associated with the utilization of the maglev with respect to the gains available from the project. However the author has mentioned some of the advantages associated with maglev. Critique of post made in week 5 The issues of the project has been developed, along with the strategies for overcoming such issues have been mentioned. Critique of post made in week 6 The issues that the Engineering Delivery Manager of the project might face while commissioning the project has been identified, besides identifying the strategies required for developing a sustainable project team. Conclusion and recommendations The Deputy prime minister of Australia declared the initiation of the high speed railway project on the east coast of Australia (also known as the ECHSR project) on the 11th of April 2013: the publication of the second (and essentially the last) project evaluation report was published on this very date, which initiated the process of project consultation and feedback. The following major points have been identified from the case study: The conduction of feasibility tests is essential prior to the initiation of any project. The roles and responsibilities of the various stakeholders associated with the project need to be identified before the project commences, along with the identification of strategies required for catering to their demands. The adherence to various well known project management strategies is essential for achieving the outcomes of the project in a sustainable manner. In the light of the discussions made in the paper the following recommendations are being provided to the manager of the ECHSR project: Adherence to environment safe methods: The project manager associated with the ECHSR project should adhere to environmentally safe methods for the development of the said railway project. Adherence to well accepted project management methodologies: The project manager is also being advice so as to utilize well accepted project management methodologies for achieving the outcomes of the project in a sustainable manner. Bibliography Burke, R., 2013.Project management: planning and control techniques. New Jersey, USA. Cameron, E. and Green, M., 2015.Making sense of change management: a complete guide to the models, tools and techniques of organizational change. Kogan Page Publishers. Carstens, D.S., Richardson, G.L. and Smith, R.B., 2013.Project Management Tools and Techniques: A Practical Guide. CRC Press. Fowler, N., Lindahl, M. and Skld, D., 2015. The Projectification of University Research: A study of resistance and accommodation of projectmanagement tools techniques.International Journal of Managing Projects in Business/Emerald,8(1). Fowler, N., Lindahl, M. and Skld, D., 2015. The projectification of university research: Hornstein, H.A., 2015. The integration of project management and organizational change management is now a necessity.International Journal of Project Management,33(2), pp.291-298. Igartua, J.I., Errasti, N. and Ganzarain, J., 2014. The Impact of Innovation Management Techniques on Radical Innovation: An Empirical Study. InManaging Complexity(pp. 35-42). Springer International Publishing. Joslin, R. and Mller, R., 2015. Relationships between a project management methodology and project success in different project governance contexts.International Journal of Project Management,33(6), pp.1377-1392. Karaman, E. and Kurt, M., 2015. Comparison of project management methodologies: prince 2 versus PMBOK for it projects. Kerzner, H.R., 2013.Project management: a systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling. John Wiley Sons. Leach, L.P., 2014.Critical chain project management. Artech House. Mathur, G., Jugdev, K. and Shing Fung, T., 2013. Project management assets and project management performance outcomes: Exploratory factor analysis.Management Research Review,36(2), pp.112-135. Phillips, J., 2013.PMP, Project Management Professional (Certification Study Guides). McGraw-Hill Osborne Media. Pritchard, C.L. and PMP, P.R., 2014.Risk management: concepts and guidance. CRC Press. Rao, M., 2012.Knowledge management tools and techniques. Routledge. Schwalbe, K., 2015.Information technology project management. Cengage Learning. Turner, J.R., 2014.The handbook of project-based management(Vol. 92). McGraw-hill. Unab, W. and Kundi, M.F.A., 2014. Review of Project Management (PM) Practices in Public Infrastructure Development Organizations of Pakistan.Journal of Strategy and Performance Management,2(4), p.144. Verzuh, E., 2015.The fast forward MBA in project management. John Wiley Sons. Walker, A., 2015.Project management in construction. John Wiley Sons. Wells, H., 2012. How effective are project management methodologies? An explorative evaluation of their benefits in practice.Project Management Journal,43(6), pp.43-58.