BAE Automated Systems - Research Paper Example

BAE AUTOMATED SYSTEMS BAE Automated Systems Table of Contents Table of Contents 2 Background 3 Main Problems 4 References 11 Abstract In the past years, the majority of organizations has started carrying out their business tasks in the forms of projects. In this scenario, a project is initiated in order to achieve certain goals and objectives. However, one most important challenge of each project is to make it operational and successful within time and given the resources. Hence, effective resource management and organization are most critical element of any project. In fact, all the way through the project lifecycle these activities run in parallel with one another. Each project moves around various aspects such as cost, quality and time. In this scenario, if any of the aspects is compromised or limited, the remaining parts of the project will also be affected. This paper presented an analysis of the Denver Airport project which involved the implementation of the Baggage Handling System. This project was initiated to automate the Airport baggage handling. However, all the way through project lifecycle this project suffered a wide variety of issues and problems. This research is aimed at analyzing those issues and aspects. The basic purpose of this paper is to outline some of the major issues and aspects that influenced the successful completion of this project. In this scenario, this research covers basic problems (management failure/problems) and their causes and fixation policy regarding Denver Airport project of Baggage Handling System. In addition, this paper will attempt to explore some of the fundamental aspects of effective project handling and management. Background The thought of initiating and effectively managing projects is long-term an objective of any project. This paper presents a detailed analysis of Airport Baggage Handling System project. All the way through the lifecycle of this project, it suffered a number of problems which happened because of ineffective management and planning of such a new technology based projects. In fact, the project of Denver International Airport’s Baggage Handling System is believed to be one of the biggest examples of less effective project management that led this project to failure and losses. Without a doubt, it was a new technology based project which demanded more high-tech technology implementation and management. In this scenario there was a greater need for the new technology based support with more accurate and high-level bagging processing capabilities. Hence, in such a huge and critical project there was a dire need for high level planning and management of issues and other aspects. In fact, most the manual processes were going to be computerized. Therefore, the airport's baggage management system was one of the significant parts of the plan. In this scenario, through automating overall airport baggage management system, aircraft turnaround time was expected to be minimized to as small as 30 minutes. Higher turnaround outlined additional well-organized processes and was a foundation stone of the airports competitive advantage in the overall marketplace (Harvard Business School, 1996). However, from start till end this project suffered various critical issues, which led the project to overall failure. Main Problems This project brought a number of issues and problems which became apparent with the initiation of the project. In spite of the high-quality plans to manage delay speedily like that underestimation of the project’s complicatedness resulted in increasing issues as well as a public disgrace for everybody concerned with the project. In this scenario, the cost, time and scope related issues led to a number of serious problems in the overall implementation of new technology based system that further caused delays in the baggage system application as well as the delay in airport’s opening even after completion of 16 months. In this scenario, expenses to arrange and maintain the vacant airport along with interest charges on building loans charged the city of Denver $1.1 Million for each day all through the period of this delay. In addition, some of the critical issues emerged because of mistakes with the means integrated an unprepared display of the system to the media that demonstrated how the system compressed bags, ejects content and how two carts moving at the extensive speed responded when they clashed with each other. On the other hand, when opening day lastly approached, the system that was delivered was just a small part of the real plan. In this scenario, in place of computerizing three concourses into one complete system, the system was presented in a solo concourse, through a single airline and simply for outbound flights. Additionally, all of the additional baggage management was carried out with straightforward conveyor belts in addition a manual tug and trolley arrangement that was quickly constructed when it turned out to be clear that the automated system would by no means attain its objectives. Moreover, after detailed planning and effective project management the system at last worked well in August 2005. So finally, United Airlines stated that they would throw out the old system entirely (Harvard Business School, 1996). Avoid the Failure This section outlines some of the important suggestions which can be followed to avoid the failure. These suggestions can be applied to minimize the project failure and improve the overall project efficiency: Scope Management When a project is initially described the scope is for all time a high-level scope as classifies in the project charter and the initial scope statement. In this scenario, the sophisticated scope is frequently presented through an order of magnitude estimate of the rate that has an exactitude of 50 percent to 100 percent of the predictable cost (Howitz, 2011; Kerzner, 2006). In case of Denver International Airport’s project, the scope was defined with a high level scope definition for managing the world’s biggest airport processes. In this scenario, the overall project was going to cover the world’s biggest airport bagging system. However, in actual fact, at that time the management and design team overlooked some of the technology based limitations and planned the project in a way that it could be able to accomplish all the possible objectives. In this scenario, the scope of the project was defined in a general way instead of being specific. At that time due to some technology based limitations and some other project management weaknesses that overall project suffered a lot. However, one of the biggest mistakes was made in the form of wide definition of project scope. Additionally, project designer had not surveyed the available technology to handle and manage the overall airport processes and operations, which caused a wide variety of issues and complexities in overall management of the project (Howitz, 2011; Kerzner, 2006). In addition, in any project the project manager should be aware of the cooperation among what they want to achieve as well as what they are in fact able to achieve. On the other hand, when objectives go beyond the capability to carry out timely outcome project will be unsuccessful certainly. It is an admitted fact that a successful project always encompasses a fine–described scope that helps them achieve practical goals, and within reach aims and objectives, creates obvious milestones, describes profits and outcomes, and carry out regular technical evaluations and dimensions. If we adopt these strict measures we can be able to make sure that the project will meet the expectations of each party involved in the project such as higher managements and clients (Howitz, 2011; Kerzner, 2006). Time Management Recognizing accurately what requires to be performed as well as when it needs to be accomplished is actually simply the initial step in effective project management and high-quality time management. In fact, it will allow the project team to make sure that all the tasks are performed when they requires to be, and to keep away the project from moving over its financial plan for the reason that it went well past the time planned intended for it (HubPages Inc., 2013; Gray, Larson, & Desai, 2010; Harvard Business School, 1996). In case of Denver International Airport’s project, the overall project was delayed 16 months from the established deadline. In fact, due to this unexpected delay the management had to face the loss of $1.1 Million each day. In this scenario, it was a huge disaster. In this scenario, the overall project failure was due to a number of aspects. The project was not well planned to match established project requirement and meet the established project goals. Due to these reasons the overall project went toward the project failure. On the opening day of the project the planned system was still un-available and un-able to deliver the preferred support and capabilities. In addition, the entire project working and operational went wrong and again management broth the manual processing system. In a such huge project disaster the project timeline was not effectively settled. Here the project milestones were never settled to offer a great deal of capability to corporate operations and workings. This overall scenario leads to huge project issues and working delays that damaged the whole project performance (HubPages Inc., 2013; Gray, Larson, & Desai, 2010; Harvard Business School, 1996). Cost Management The project of Denver International Airport was planned to be completed within the budget of $300 Millions. In this scenario the project was intended to be completed within the allocated time line. In such a huge project the overall cost definition was good. Though, the allocated resources and project working plan was also good but issues regarding project working and technology delayed the overall project. In addition, the over costing of the project also damaged the project allocated budget and made the whole project down. It outlined that one factor from the project’s triple constraints if alters then we need to change the other factors accordingly. In case of the Denver International Airport the overall project triple constraints were overlooked and project was not altered to meet the deadlines accordingly (Piscopo, 2013; Owens, Burke, Krynovich, & Mance, 2007; Kerzner, 2006; Harvard Business School, 1996). Quality Management Quality is one of the most important factors in any project success. In case of effective project management we need to take care for effective project working and the quality of each project phase. In case of the Denver International Airport project there are a number of aspects those were overlooked and consequently project led to the overall failure. Here are a lot of documented issues linked with the automated technology based baggage system at DIA, however the majority of them had root reasons that centered on 5 main aspects: the difficulty of the arrangement having scope change, novelty of the technology; elevated amount of project description doubt; and the short time distance for completion. In the above listed issues the project was in really bad condition. In such scenario the management needed to allocate quality management guidelines and rules so that the project could offer more enhanced project working and operational support. In case of less effective project working and operations the project quality aspect was overlooked and project turned out to be a failure (Wallace, 2007; Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 2013; Harvard Business School, 1996). Risk Management Project risk management and application of effective risk management plan are critical for the successful completion of a project. Project of Denver International Airport was a huge project that required more effective planning and management of issues. In this scenario there was need of effective project planning through application of effective risk assessment and management plan. For application of effective risk management plan, project manager should have paid a great deal of attention to this area and offered it sufficient time as well as effort in spite of time pressure. However, in the Denver International Airport project all the above mentioned aspects were overlooked by the project manager. This project required the project manager to plan and prioritize the project risks and issues to better manage and handle such issue is much better way (New Product Dynamics., 2012; Tusler, 1996). Communication Management The effective project management requires effective communication all the way through the project lifecycle. In case of effective application of project internal and external communication the whole team will be able to better manage and handle the project. However the effective communication needs the effective application of project management methodology that was not effectively applied in scenario of Denver International Airport’s project. In this scenario, effective applications of project methodology can strength project manager to formulate on-the-fly decisions, and objective analysis. In such conditions the new project aspects and areas were not effectively communicated among the project team and not well managed to project operations that caused various project issues and project regarding effective management of project working and operations (Sharma, 2010; Product & Process Innovation, Inc. , 2012; Mehta, 2010). Conclusion A project is initiated to achieve some goals within a predefined budget and resources. The success of a project heavily depends on a number of aspects involved in the project, which vary from project to project. This paper has presented an analysis of problem areas and aspects of a project named as a bagging handling system which was initiated by Denver Airport. However, this project became problematic and faced serious issues which delayed the completion of the project and caused serious losses. This paper has discussed some of the important aspects and issues that emerged in this project. This paper has discussed cost, time and quality management issues, which made Denver International Airport project’s a failure. This paper has also suggested ways to improve these aspects. References Gray, C., Larson, E., & Desai, G. V. (2010). Project Management, The Managerial Process (4th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill. Harvard Business School. (1996). BAE Automated Systems (A): Denver International Airport Baggage-Handling System. Harvard Business School. Howitz, C. (2011, April 14). Scope Management: Don’t Let Your Project Fail Because of The Scope Creep. Retrieved March 29, 2013, from http://blog.simcrest.com/scope-management-dont-let-your-project-fail-because-of-scope-creep/ HubPages Inc. (2013). Project Time Management. Retrieved March 30, 2013, from http://doups3.hubpages.com/hub/Project-Time-Management Kerzner, H. (2006). Project management: A systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling (10th ed.). New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. Mehta, A. (2010). Communication in Project Management. Retrieved April 03, 2013, from http://www.pmiglc.org/comm/articles/0410_mehta_comm.pdf New Product Dynamics. (2012). Project Risk Management: A Proactive Approach. Retrieved April 03, 2013, from http://www.netcomuk.co.uk/~rtusler/ Owens, J., Burke, S., Krynovich, M., & Mance, D. J. (2007). Project Cost Control Tools and Techniques. Retrieved April 03, 2013, from http://www.jasonowens.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/ProjectCostControlTools_and_Techniques.pdf Piscopo, M. (2013). Cost Management Plan. Retrieved April 02, 2013, from http://www.projectmanagementdocs.com/project-planning-templates/cost-management-plan.html Product & Process Innovation, Inc. . (2012). Project Management Communication Tools & Techniques. Retrieved April 02, 2013, from http://www.projectmanagementguru.com/communication.html Sharma, R. (2010). The Road to Better Project Communication Management. Retrieved April 04, 2013, from http://www.brighthubpm.com/certification/85785-the-road-to-better-project-communication-management/ Tusler, R. (1996). Reducing Project Management Risk. Retrieved April 03, 2013, from http://www.netcomuk.co.uk/~rtusler/ Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. (2013). Project Management Methodology/Life Cycle Overview. Retrieved April 03, 2013, from http://www.itplanning.org.vt.edu/pm/methodology.html Wallace, S. (2007). Quality Management. Retrieved April 02, 2013, from http://www.epmbook.com/quality.htm Read More