Superconducting Supercollider - Project Management - Case Study Example

      Case Study 13.2 The Superconducting Supercollider is an example of a project that begun with tremendous display and was silently terminated. The project was presumed to be a particle physics structure and got financial support after a concentrated contest between a number of societies attempting to accommodate the complex (Pinto 406). A mixture of significant funding together with extremely inefficient project management, and technical difficulties led to claims of unwarranted expenses, exaggerated expenses, and sloppy work. All these issues played a part in the speedy deterioration in the attitude of federal administration toward continuing with the project and consequently, the failure of the project. This paper will look at the Superconducting Supercollider project by addressing three questions that relates to it. Question 1 As a consultant, I would utilize the following steps to reintroduce a positive turn on the Superconducting Supercollider. One, I would attempt to comprehend the relationship between stakeholders and connection with the Superconducting Supercollider project. It is paramount to note that for us to comprehend every stakeholder’s negotiating and interests both collectively and personally and how the Superconducting Supercollider operates, people should comprehend the nature of the relation between a number of stakeholders and their association with the project. This will entail power and culture relations. This will enhance the success of the project. Two, I would promote interactions and communications. Communication and interaction will permit those involved in the Superconducting Supercollider project exchange useful ideas. Communication and interaction is essential for project leaders for associations with both stakeholders and individuals that may be opposing the priorities of project vision and objectives. If project leaders can develop a trustworthy basis of comprehending the influence of all players in the project and their significance, they can avert a disaster in a challenging situation (Pinto 406). Three, I would address the perception and effect of stakeholders and their management in the Superconducting Supercollider project. Every project faces the risk of perception, especially, a negative perception during its implementation. For example, in the Superconducting Supercollider, negative views by various parties caused severe challenges to the project. In addition, an insufficient management of the stakeholder concerns may frequently lead to controversies and conflicts about the implementation of the Superconducting Supercollider project. Therefore, addressing the perception and effect of stakeholders will guarantee the smooth running of the project. Finally, I would, align incentives, motivations, and values. Aligning values needs a willingness to share beliefs and perspectives through dialogue and sufficient communication, and an urge to permit shared values to evolve and develop through dialogue. Incentives will be given to stakeholders for realizing the objectives and aims of the Superconducting Supercollider project (Pinto 406). Incentives or motivations may function as a catalyst or stimulus for a significant performance for long. Question 2 There were a number of warning signals signifying the failure of the project. These indications could have been anticipated and tackled. In my opinion, the Superconducting Supercollider project was impossible to accomplish. One, the troublesome nature of the contest for the situation of the Superconducting Supercollider was assured to guarantee that defeated societies, and their federal delegates, would be angry and not likely to offer the Superconducting Supercollider project the cooperation and support that it required. Two, the manner in which the Superconducting Supercollider funding was primarily dished out, at a dragging pace because of Federal deficit issues, made it challenging for the project to take off resiliently. As a matter of fact, the project had to start sluggishly and was never able to enhance momentum. Three, the Superconducting Supercollider project was promoted based on the European financial assistance, which did not take place. When this inadequate funding became apparent, it gave the opponents of the project sufficient arguments to terminate the project (Pinto 406). Four, cost approximates for the Superconducting Supercollider project continued to go up far beyond the stipulated amount. As the project advanced on both the design and the construction of the facilities, projected costs and expenses went up tremendously. This caused tremendous doubt on the correctness of the present adjusted financial estimations. This meant that additional costs were to be inflicted on the United States citizens. Five, the commercial utilization of the Superconducting Supercollider was presumed to be minimal. It may be asserted that the Superconducting Supercollider would not play a part in the forthcoming global competitiveness of American sector. Six, the Superconducting Supercollider project did not guarantee long term employment for the large numbers of high-energy particle physicists and allocation of riches to Texas. This meant the project was going to face objections from the physicists and individuals from the area. Finally, knowledge of previous government financed projects had produced unsatisfactory results for the citizens (Pinto 407). Therefore, the Superconducting Supercollider project was not going to be successful judging from the previous disastrous government projects. Question 3 The bulk stories on the Superconducting Supercollider present it in a negative manner. The stories highlight the failures and negative aspects of the project. Nonetheless, there are three foremost lessons that can be derived from this project. They include; lesson on public backing for basic science, lesson on the role of politics, and lesson on foreign involvement. Lesson on Public Backing for Basic Science One can learn a lesson on public backing for basic science. The super collider did not seize sufficient backing from the American population (Pinto 407). This may be attributed to the difficulty in comprehending the scientific promise of the project. During that time, studies indicated science learning in America fell behind that of other industrialized countries. Therefore, there should be additional attempts to enhance technical and scientific literacy in education. Lesson on the Role of Politics Political backing for significant projects appears to be precisely comparative to the narrow gains attained; yet distributing the riches of significant projects attracts suitable criticism from the political field. When different states were contesting for the Superconducting Supercollider location, the degree of political backing was massive. Nonetheless, when Texas was chosen as the location, the tremendous interest disappeared (Pinto 407). Lesson on Foreign Involvement It is evident that foreign involvement should be included in significant science and technology projects from their inception. Conversely, even though America has established that it cannot finance considerable projects, it has not illustrated that it can pursue such activities with other countries. The sudden discontinuation of the Superconducting Supercollider has raised concerns on the country’s reliability on research projects (Pinto 407). Work Cited Pinto, J. K. Project Management: Achieving Competitive Advantage (2nd ed.). New Jersey: prentice Hall, 2010. Print. Read More