Business Project Management - Boeing - Essay Example

Boeing Case Study Q Scope of work as a government official ment of problem America has been under threat, which heightened after the 9/11 attacks. The context of the problem is that America shares a huge border with Mexico (about 2000 miles long) and Canada. The problem of illegal immigrants, drug trafficking and human trafficking has been haunting the United States for a long time. Concrete solution at this point is mandatory. One solution is to build a sealed borderline, therefore, any movement across the border can be monitored properly. Information Gathering Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Government of the United States, the government of Mexico, and the government of Canada are the main parties involved. The multibillion-dollar contract for sealing the border is called Secure Border Initiative Net (SBInet). In a nutshell this project will be centered on the Nogales, Texas to monitor and control about 6000 miles stretch of the border with Canada and Mexico. Boeing Company will be awarded this contract. It has a history in military contracts and weapon systems. Boeings Integrated Defense Systems Unit will be the main dealing unit. The reason for choosing Boeing is their experience in listening devices, motion sensors, cameras, monitoring tower and overall security system. Constraints The major constraint is the sheer stretch of the border. It is a common idea that the interdependent time related activities must be performed and completed within the given time limits (Gutjahr, Strauss & Wagner, 2000). It is not a small project in terms of cost, time and manpower required to properly seal and monitor the border. The biggest constraint is to get the approval of the Senate and the public to fund a multibillion dollar project. Narrative building is mandatory. The government needs to convince and win the sympathies of the people and the politicians to get the taxpayers’ money to fund such a project. Alternative Analysis The alternative analysis reveals that the situation on the border can be improved through indirect means. The Mexican border is notorious for providing sneaky passage for illegal immigrants. If the economic and security situation in Mexico improves, people would not be risking their lives to cross into the United States. But from the perspective of the U.S. this is almost impossible to achieve. The United States does not dictate the Mexican Government. The U.S. can only suggest improvements. The only option is to secure the border. Either the U.S. can build up fences and seal it shut or it can deploy so much manpower that they stop any illegal immigrant or drug smuggler that tries to sneak into the US soil. They would be confronted with border police, but this is not achievable because most of the area along the border line with Mexico is harsh desert. Manpower can be deployed at certain points but not all the way along the 2000 mile border. It is in the interest of all to semi-automate border security by building walls, sensors and towers. Project Objectives The major output is a secure border. In the broader context it means less drug and human trafficking, less illegal aliens and terrorists in the United States. This is the measure of success. The required resources include the funding from the taxes, the efficient use of those funds towards building towers, walls, sensors etc. The initial estimates suggest a requirement of $1.1 billion investment. The time to complete is 20 years. The clear-cut purpose of the whole project is to seal the border shut. It is up to the expertise of the contract-winning company how they actually achieve it. Statement of work Introduction and background United States has been facing terror threats. In the wake of porous borders with Mexico and Canada the situation is getting worse. Drugs, illegal immigrants and terrorists can get in the United States without any check. In order to rectify the situation the US needs to seal the borders on both sides. For this purpose a huge project needs to be outsourced to companies with the expertise in defense mechanisms. Technical description Although it is up to the winning company what kind of technical equipment they deploy on the border. But a chain of towers to monitor the border is probably imperative. It also depends on the applicability of these plans if such towers and the chains are feasible and fall within the budget. The distance between each tower is determined by the terrain of the border. Moreover, each tower needs to have a specific capability of monitoring a certain area. This safety radius around one tower will determine the number of towers needed to secure the 2000 mile long line. In addition, specific sensors that can sense walking, vehicle movement, bicycle or digging need to be deployed. Timeline and Milestones In just a few words the plan is to add 100 miles of border security every year. The whole plan is spanned on to 20 years. The following table illustrates yearly progress. The same simple table will be used to write off annual progress. Timeline Milestone Year 1 100 miles Year 2 200 miles Year 3 300 miles Year 4 400 miles Year 5 500 miles Year 6 600 miles Year 7 700 miles Year 8 800 miles Year 9 900 miles Year 10 1000 miles Year 11 1100 miles Year 12 1200 miles Year 13 1300 miles Year 14 1400 miles Year 15 1500 miles Year 16 1600 miles Year 17 1700 miles Year 18 1800 miles Year 19 1900 miles Year 20 2000 miles Expectation The government expectations are highly realistic. The government understands that its not possible to completely secure the border. There will be illegal immigrants, drug trafficking and terrorist. But the point of doing all of this is to reduce the number of these illegal activities. Having said that, annual progress and an audit of the 100 mile secure border will be performed. It will be to see if it is truly providing security. Every year the government will make suggestions for improvement under the guidance of the DHA. The performance of the ‘secured’ border will be added to the work. Additional work is expected to be accomplished with due diligence by the company that wins the contract. Q. 2 Stakeholder communications matrix - Project managers Identifying Stakeholders There are four major stakeholders in the contract for securing the US-Mexican border. The primary stakeholder is the US government, then the Boeing company, the subcontractors and finally the Mexican government. The major stakeholder is the US government that needs the protection of its border. They do not have the expertise to secure it themselves. That is why they need a company that can manage this project such as Boeing Company. The stake of Boeing Company is to deliver reliable and sustainable quality. Until the completion of the project it needs to update the US Govt. (the client) with satisfactory progress. The Mexican government is a stakeholder because it is with their cooperation that the borderline is secured. Their collaboration is needed. The cross-border police can coordinate with each other to improve the border security. The subcontractors are those individual companies that the Boeing will be outsourcing various tasks such as the installing sensors, building the towers, other surveillance gadgets like cameras, night visions and motion sensors, tower communication system and devising a response plan. High Power Low Low Interest High The above matrix gives a standard for prioritizing the stakeholders. It is apparent that the US government is the primary stakeholder. Moreover the US government also needs to be updated with improvements and work progress. The Boeing Company is the second major stakeholder because they need to provide the quality for border security. Analysis of the stakeholders The US government cannot be treated as an uninformed stakeholder. They have the support of the DHS and other security services. They will be closely monitoring the progress, after all it is an issue of national interest. Moreover, the Boeing Company will probably need to deliver additional services because after every audit of the progress, the US will suggest improvements. The US government will analyze what is working and what isnt. For instance, they can suggest improvements such as modify the towers. In this case the Boeing Company will have to modify the previous towers as well as build new and improved towers according to the feedback from the security agencies. The Boeing Company is a huge name in aviation and manufacturing industry. They have a track record of partnering with the military. They have not took on a task of this proportion. But they have been collaborating with military regarding surveillance and defense equipment. Due diligence is expected of them. Considering the huge name they certainly seem to possess the ability to cope with this task. The point is they have to live up to expectations as well as set a standard of probably collaborating one of the biggest border securing project they have ever taken. The Mexican government is not as involved as the US government but their collaboration is required. In case an illegal immigrant crosses it will greatly depend on the communication between the US and Mexican border police to coordinate with each other on how to hand the immigrant back. Similarly, if they the Mexican border police improves their own security measures it would be harder for illegal immigrants, drug traffickers and other criminals to cross the border. The Mexican police will (expectedly) nip the evil in the bud. It would be harder for them to carry out and cross over in the United States. And lastly the subcontractors will provide services based on short contracts to the Boeing Company. It is up to the discretion of the Boeing Company to find competent subcontractors. They can order the best surveillance cameras with maximum range, night vision and networking system. Communication strategy The flow of information would be mainly between the Boeing Company and the US government. The company needs to provide updates on the progress. If they find a hurdle or need additional support from the US government, they need to be prompt. They might need additional border permissions such as requesting a larger area to be secured. The Boeing Company reports to the US government regarding every issue. The communication flow is majorly from the Boeing Company to the US government. The subcontractors report to the Boeing Company and US government is not responsible for the subcontractors. The government deals directly with the Boeing Company so it is up to the discretion of the multinational manufacturer to find better subcontractors. Eventually the project is under the Boeings wing. There will not be much communication with the Mexican border police regarding the construction of the towers. However, a friendly relation will help ease the situation and will strengthen the cause of securing the border. Q.3 The three major risk factors Cost The first major risk factor is the cost. Initially a project that was estimated to be completed within $1.1 billion budget escalated to about eight times. A project of this magnitude has never been done before. Securing a 2000 mile long borderline with towers, walls, surveillance cameras and sensors is an extremely difficult task. Accurately predicting the cost is a risk. The $1.1 billion is only an estimate. In order to mitigate the situation a feasibility study needs to be performed by both the US government and the Boeing Company. The major critics of the projects should also get on board to provide suggestions. An accurate figure for the cost of such a huge project is essential. Small increments are understandable but not those that put the parliament approval into trouble. If cost projections is based on rough estimates then the project can linger on indefinitely. The government will need to go to the Senate again to get approval for more funds. Time The second risk factor is time. It is only an estimate to complete 100 miles of secure border within a year. With that rate a 20 year period is scheduled to complete the whole 2000 mile border. The first 100 miles need to be completed effectively to see how the progress is going. Suggestions for improvement in terms of cost and reduction of time can be incorporated into the project. The basic equation is that the longer the project delays the more funds it will consume. It is in the interests of the US government to complete the project within the scheduled time. The sooner the border is secure there will be less illegal activity crossing over into the United States. The United States will have better security system. One mitigating strategy to gauge time would be to first finish the 100 mile and note the time and performance. An audit should pinpointing specific loopholes that did not let the project finish within time. Such issues should be addressed after the first year. The milestone are set specifically for this purpose so that the next milestone can be achieved within budget and schedule. Performance of Security Measures The third risk factor after constructing towers and deploying sensors is if the border is truly secure or not. As it has been mentioned that the terrain on the Mexican border is not easy. There are harsh deserts under the scorching sun. It would be very difficult to seal it shut. The project starts from the Texas border, which means that the crime rate, illegal aliens, drugs and other illegal activity that usually crosses over from the border should diminish. The security agencies need to see if there been any improvement in the crime rate? Has it been brought down? If not, then the security loopholes need to be addressed. The DHA needs to see if the towers are not secure enough or if the sensors are not working properly. Or if there is something wrong with camera performance. Whatever the security issue it needs to be addressed immediately or right after the completion of the first hundred miles (the first milestone). This mitigating factor is essential. Otherwise, even if the whole border is completed it would be useless because if its porous then the illegal activity will continue. Q. 4 Termination of the Project The termination of project is a sad incident if the project was not successful. If it was due to the incompetence of the provider then certain issues need to be addressed. In the case of SBInet, the major reason was the failure to integrate the security system. Whatever the case, when the project is terminated the first thing is to state the reasons for termination. This information needs to be succinct and communicated clearly to every party to the contract. A reader with a rudimentary knowledge of project management should be able to comprehend this document (Westland, 2006). In this case the Boeing Company, the US government and the subcontractors need to be informed. This statement should be clear and understandable by all the parties. Second, this draft should clearly mention what deliverables have been performed and which ones are left. All the material regarding the procedures such as manuals, flowcharts, drawings, the blueprints, software, brochures, reports and data needs to be handed over to the government. All of which is government property. A sensitive task such as securing the border requires due diligence and handling of sensitive information. The Boeing Company needs to hand everything back to the government. The project related documentation needs to be properly organized even if it is being terminated. On the other hand, the project manager needs to identify the reasons for termination. As the case suggests no one could accurately predict the cost of the project. It kept ballooning. Initially it was $1.1 billion and later it escalated up to $8 billion. The parliament could not keep funding such a project that had no end in sight. From the governance perspective the US government needs to procure every single document and needs to study what went wrong in projecting the cost. It is not feasible to blame one party whether the US government could not predict the time/scope of the whole project or the Boeing was incompetent in integrating the security system. The responsibility lies on both parties. After the first milestone they should have addressed the major issues. The project manager should have addressed or at least have identified that the project is more complicated than they had initially predicted. Better technology and advanced management tools strengthen the functioning of PM (Kwak, 2005). The draft should clearly mention what kind of managerial tools could have improved the process. The project team should organize all the documentation which include the suggestions for improving the project, integration and cost projections. Reference Gutjahr, W. J., Strauss, C., & Wagner, E. (2000). A stochastic branch-and-bound approach to activity crashing in project management. INFORMS Journal on Computing, 12(2), 125-135. Kwak, Y. H. (2005). A brief history of Project Management. The story of managing projects. Westland, J. (2006). The project management life cycle. ISBN, 749445556, 5-37. Read More