Plans Miscarry because of Agreements EIC - Term Paper Example

ASSIGNMENT BRIEF By Name Course Instructor Institution City/State Date Assignment Brief Part 1 – UCLan’s proposed EIC Building Introduction There is a plan to construct a new circa civic square worth £60 million as well as student support centre for UCLan. The Hawkins\Brown design was selected since it features an LED lighting underfoot, a biodiverse roof, pavilion café bar as well as an enormous glass façade for creating feelings of airiness space and light. There are two main types of project management methods; the PMBOK Guide and PRINCE2, whereby the former is considered as descriptive, and the latter as prescriptive. In this part, PMBOK Guide has been selected as the most suitable method of project management for the construction of UCLan’s proposed Engineering Innovation Centre (EIC) Building since it contains many descriptions of processes, techniques and tools. Discussion More importantly, PMBOK describes all the processes’ outputs, but has not explanation on what information could be valuable for recording in such outputs. On the other hand, PRINCE2 explain what information could be valuable for recording in the processes’ outputs, and also indicates the individuals responsible for recording these things. As noted by Buehring (2017), PRINCE2 comprises of four integrated elements: processes, themes, principles, as well as tailoring. It creates an all-inclusive method that can be applied without difficulty on all projects, regardless of their type and scale. Buehring (2017) posits that PRINCE2 is suitable for project management methodology because of its relative applicability and simplicity to every project. However, many studies as cited by Karaman and Kurt (2015), PRINCE2 place strong emphaisis on the continuou Business Case, but PMBOK mechanisms are more stronger. PRINCE2 progress and change themes are akin to the PMBOK’s control and monitor processes area. The only advantage PRINCE2 has over PMBOK is attributed to its much emphasis on the business case. PMBOK will be suitable for UCLan’s proposed EIC Building because it has stronger mechanisms that define the human resources’ management as well as their roles and responsibilities. As mentioned by Karaman and Kurt (2015), PRINCE2 is more suitable for small-sized projects while PMBOK is more preferable for the projects that have high client commitment, complex as well as large project teams, high outsourcing level, high stakeholder engagement level, and comprehensive contracts. PMBOK will be valuable for UCLan’s project because of many reasons; for instance, it will enable the UCLan’s project team to standardize practices across the university. That is to say, the individuals involved in the development stage of the project exert same effort as those in distribution stage. Besides that, PMBOK would help UCLan’s project managers to apply the standardized system. More importantly, PMBOK highlights what work and what does not work; thus, will enable UCLan to prevent project failure. Additionally, PMBOK would be valuable since the project managers can tailor their process of project management to best fit the UCLan’s needs. The PMBOK gathers the collective knowledge and understanding of the whole project management profession in one place. Therefore, it does not matter how complex UCLan’s project is since something useful can be found in the PMBOK to help manage the projects successfully. The PMBOK processes are represented separately to facilitate the understanding and in reality they are unbelievably interdependent as well as iterative.  In addition, the techniques and tools in all processes are suggestions for what UCLan’s project team could utilize if deemed suitable. Through the PMBOK Guide, UCLan’s project team can build their own suitable methodology of project management, one which is appropriate for the team and UCLan’s projects. According to Nasir et al. (2015), a number of studies have demonstrated the positive impact associated with utilizing PMBOK; for instance, this method enabled and guided the project team to structure and plan the project and also define the stakeholders’ roles and responsibility. This was demonstrated by the Resistance Temperature Detectors Bypass Elimination (RTDBE), a large-scale project carried out by ComEd. Through applications of PMBOK management principles sets, Nasir et al. (2015) posit that RTDBE project completion was within budget and on time, and the outage was not affected adversely. Conclusion This part has demonstrated why PMBOK Guide is the most suitable method of project management for the construction of UCLan’s proposed Engineering Innovation Centre (EIC) Building. PMBOK would enable the UCLan’s project team to standardize the process of implementation of all projects carried out. PMBOK would enable the team to analyze the activities across different units with the aim of creating procedures that are standardized and which will ultimately result in an improved means of project management. Besides that, PMBOK offers a simple guide to the steps of project management; thus, making it easier for the team to carry out their functions utilizing the guide offered by PMBOK. Part 2 – Managing and Project (Titanic Ship) Introduction When the titanic was being constructed, it was the largest ship to ever been built. Titanic was approximately 274 metres long, weighed unbelievably 46,000 tonnes, and was 25 stories high (Bassett, 2000). The ship’s technology and design were deemed modern since it had some major compartments that were watertight in the lower section which made it possible to seal off when the hull punctured. Her builders considered it as the unsinkable ship. They further argued that Titanic would remain afloat for some days after a worst possible accident such as the collision of two ships; thus, making it possible for the nearby ships to come to the rescue. However, in 1912, the Titanic sank in not more than three hours after sideswiping a large iceberg. The collision damaged almost 91 metres of the Titanic’s hull; thus, allowing water to flood six out of the sixteen major compartments considered watertight. Titanic was heading to the United States with over 2200 people aboard (passengers and crew). The disastrous accident led to the death of 1,517 people (Bassett, 2000). Following what appeared to be a minor collision between a ship and an iceberg, Titanic, which was then biggest ship ever built sank after a short period of time. In this part, the analysis focuses on Titanic, particularly on the successes and failures as well as the lessons learned. Successes and Failures Following the collision between the ship and the iceberg, the rivets and the hull failed because due to the brittle fracture. This is considered as a disastrous structural materials failure considering that the brittle fracture happens at exceedingly high speeds and devoid of prior plastic deformation. As mentioned by Bassett (2000), the brittle fracture normally happens because of high impact loading, low temperature, as well as the high content of sulphur. During the time of the Titanic disaster, all of these factors were operational: The temperature of the water was lower than the freezing point, the speed of Titanic while colliding with the iceberg was exceedingly high, and high sulphur levels were present in the hull steel. Therefore, when the hull plates were torn by the iceberg, it led to the creation of huge holes which made it possible for water to flood the ship’s hull. In consequence, rivets that were not in contact with the iceberg also experienced the incredible forces. The hull plates, akin to a huge lever transmitted the inward forces, which were applied to the cracked plates’ edges through the water that was going into the hull, along the seams of the plate into the rivets. As a result, the rivets were either snapped into two pieces or elongated leading to the breaking of the caulking that was installed along the seams; thus, offering an additional water inlet to flood the Titanic. Aside from material failures, the Titanic disaster was also attributed to watertight compartments’ poor design and their positioning in the lower section of the ship. As indicated by Bassett (2000), the ship’s lower section had a total of 16 watertight compartments which could be sealed off easily in case of a puncture in any part of the hull as well as the leaking water. Following the collision, some of the watertight compartments were extremely damaged leading to the compartments’ complete sealing off, but when the Titanic’s bow started pitching forward from the water weight in that section of the ship, the damaged compartments started spilling over the water into the nearby compartments. The ship builders had boasted that the compartments were watertight, but it was established that they were only impermeable horizontally since the walls had been extended some feet beyond the waterline and the tops were open. The water could have been contained if the transverse bulkheads were some feet taller. In addition, this could have prevented spill over from the damaged compartments and the sinking duration could have been slowed; thus, making it possible for the close by ships to offer assistance. Still, the bow compartments were flooded leading to the flooding of the whole ship. Despite the fact that the builders knew that the ship would ferry many people from one point to another, the lifeboats capacity onboard was insufficient. At the time of the disaster, Titanic was carrying approximately 2,200 people, but the available lifeboats could only handle nearly half of the people aboard the ship. Ironically, Titanic had complied with all the existing marine laws. According to the British Board of Trade, all ships weighing over 10,000 metric tonnes had to have at least sixteen lifeboats. The number of lifeboats aboard Titanic was twenty; thus, it complied with the requirement by having more lifeboats than required. Still, the total mass of the ship was more than 40,000 metrics tonnes, which is significantly more as compared to the criteria of classification that was utilised by the British Board of Trade. At the time of the accident, the Board had not updated the lifeboat requirements for over two decades; therefore, the incongruity was because of regulations that were designed before the Titanic was built. In addition, prior to the Titanic accident, no major loss of life has been recorded for nearly four decades. Therefore, the lifeboats were deemed as mere tools for ferrying passengers into the rescuing vessels instead of being designed ensure that the people in the ship remain afloat after the ship sinks. The builders had a misconception that if the ship sinks, there will be adequate time for the people to be evacuated. Although the existing lifeboats could have saved 1,178 people, only 705 were saved; thus, leaving more than 500 unused seats on the lifeboats (Kelly, 2013). According to Kelly (2013), this was attributed partially to poor training amongst the crew with regard to procedures for evacuation. Lessons Learned There are a number of lessons learned from the titanic disaster; for instance, the key stakeholders the White Star Lines RMS Titanic collaborated to come up with a plan to overcome the completion posed by Cunard by focusing on luxury instead of speed. This demonstrates that project managers have to clearly understand the key stakeholders of the project and their expectations. More importantly, they should define ways of agreeing to the strategic goals as well as the approach to achieve them. Initially, safety and were the main driver for ship’s design, but this was misinterpreted by poor communications resulting in a popular myth that the ship was practically unsinkable. The builders made some changes in order to build a luxury ship, which consequently placed the safety of the ship at risk since the number of lifeboats was in order to improve the views of the first Class passengers. Furthermore, the ship’s full height bulkheads were reduced with the aim building a big dining room. The lesson learned from this issue is that when scope changes are made on the project, the team must search for the recurring problems. The Titanic builders failed to examine whether the changes made had compromised the safety of the ship. More importantly, members of the project team should be trained to gain knowledge of the project and how to handle the issues that crop up. The Titanic crew lacked enough training since they were given just 5 days for preparation; thus, making it exceedingly difficult for them to familiarise with the ship’s layout. As mentioned by APM (2014), when the project scope is changed as evidenced during the construction of Titanic, it regularly lead to operational and communication. This normally happens when the full impacts are not considered, or delays attributed to the development are recovered by reducing the test periods. The project manager should learn how to make adjustments, considering that the leaders of the project normally blamed for the disaster.  When Titanic’s crew was warned regarding the icebergs, they plowed ahead rather than moving to the Plan B. Therefore, when project managers are warned about a looming problem, they must be flexible and brainstorm with the team members to find a suitable solution.   Project Management Method Through the lens of PMBOK, the Titanic Project is examined. The White Star Line company started the project with the aim of designing, building, as well as launching three super liners, through modern emerging technologies. The aim of these ships was to outpace the competition put forth by the Cunard liners. Whereas the Cunard Line was recognised widely for their speed, the White Star Line placed emphasis on the reliability and comfort. The main goal of the project was to build three super liners with the aim of leveraging the emerging technology that was accessible at that time. The objective of the project was delivering three Olympic-class ships in a span of 84 months. The first two ships were staggered in order to finance the third ship. The ships’ main considerations were luxury, comfort, size, and a speed that is reasonably high. The Titanic business case was extremely solid since 75 per cent of the total revenue was sourced from the first-class passage. Besides that, revenue was also sourced from the cargo as well as mail delivery. During the titanic’s maiden voyage, the ship was carrying over half a million pieces of mail and 3,500 bags. This was considered as a major way of saving costs since the fleet size was reduced from six small ships to three large vessels. More importantly, the economies of scale were sourced from the reduced number of employees, lower costs of maintenance and less fuel consumption. Therefore, the cost of building the three ships could have been repaid after years of operation considering that Titanic was built from the revenue generated by the other two ships. Given that the project sponsor was determined to build a first class experience, this turned out to be the project mantra and was consistent with the business case as well as the overall objectives of the project. As mentioned by Bau (2006), the PMBOK guide in the Titanic project would have offered numerous opportunities; for instance, it could have raised the risk awareness and culture. Thus, it would have been possible for Titanic to avoid the risk situations by getting rid of risky customs and practices. PMBOK would have improved communications management by making sure hands-on experiences and ideas are shared on time. Conclusion The Titanic disaster was attributed to the assumption that the ship had adequate safety features to protect it from sinking. This made the passengers and crew believe that Titanic was unsinkable. However, the builders had compromised safety measures by changing the project scope to allow for the luxury and the first class aspects to be included in the ship. This demonstrates that many projects fail because of compromises made all through the project. References APM, 2014. Titanic lesson in project management. [Online] Available at: HYPERLINK "https://www.apm.org.uk/news/titanic-lesson-in-project-management/" https://www.apm.org.uk/news/titanic-lesson-in-project-management/ [Accessed 22 April 2017]. Bassett, V., 2000. Causes and Effects of the Rapid Sinking of the Titanic. [Online] Available at: HYPERLINK "http://writing.engr.psu.edu/uer/bassett.html" http://writing.engr.psu.edu/uer/bassett.html [Accessed 22 April 2017]. Bau, M.S., 2006. Project management for post-disaster events--Sri Lanka Project Galle 2005. In PMI® Global Congress 2006—EMEA. Madrid, Spain, 2006. Project Management Institute. Buehring, S., 2017. PRINCE2 vs the PMBOK Guide: A comparison. [Online] Available at: HYPERLINK "https://www.knowledgetrain.co.uk/resources/qualifications/prince2-and-pmbok-guide-comparison" https://www.knowledgetrain.co.uk/resources/qualifications/prince2-and-pmbok-guide-comparison [Accessed 22 April 2017]. Karaman, E. & Kurt, M., 2015. Comparison of project management methodologies: prince 2 versus PMBOK for it projects. Int. Journal of Applied Sciences and Engineering Research, vol. 4, no. 4, pp.572-79. Kelly, H., 2013. The Sinking Of the Titanic. In PT-YR: Coastal and Ocean Engineering ENGI.8751 Undergraduate Student Forum. St. john’s, NL, Canada, 2013. Nasir, M.H.N.M., Sahibuddin, S., Ahmad, R. & Fauzi, S.S.M., 2015. ow the PMBOK Addresses Critical Success Factors for Software Projects: A Multi-round Delphi Study. Journal of Software, vol. 10, no. 11, pp.1283-300. Read More