Project of Markeaton Park - Research Paper Example

INTRODUCTION Managing project is a critical task and managing of project is important in order to complete the project within the cost, time and with the specified quality (Bredillet, 2005). Project management has become an important part of the organization as completion of project within the deadline, cost and quality are critical for the success of the project (Phillips, 2003). The report has been divided into four main sections; the first section discusses why the selected project of Markeaton Park is a project and therefore the characteristics of a project would be analysed on the project of Markeaton Park. This section also describes different phases and stages of the investment being made on Markeaton Park and this would be analysed using project management tool, Gantt chart. In the second section of the report, the success and failure factors of the investment on Markeaton Park has been examined and analysed and whether this investment is appropriate or not. Moreover, how the project has been handled and managed has been discussed in the second section along with analyzing the performance of the project. The third section of the report discusses the notable contribution to the project outcomes whether they were positive and negative. The last section of the report discusses about the recommendations about the project that would have improved the outcomes of the project and helped the management to better achieve the aims and objectives of the project and how the overall project could have been improved. background of the project This report analyses one of the recent projects regarding Markeaton Park. More than 300 parks and open spaces are present in the region of Derby (Derby City Council, 2012a) however among these parks, Markeaton Park is the most popular park and it attracts more than one million visitors annually thus it reveals how popular the park is. Moreover, it is the most used and most visited parks in the Derby area (Derby City Council, 2012b). Although the park is famous park but the number of visitors are declining particularly because of lack of investment on the park and because of the reason that several facilities of the park do not meet the needs of the customers. Therefore there is a need to improve the condition of the park and to renovate different facilities of the park. Bid to develop and improve the facilities of the park has been made for almost £2.4 million by the Council to the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) (Derby City Council, 2012a). analysis Whether MARKEATON PARK investment is A PROJECT In order to analyse the investment made on Markeaton Park is a project or not, the characteristics of the project would be discussed and then they will be analysed on the Markeaton Park. If these characteristics are matched then Markeaton Park investment would be referred as a project. Definition and characteristics of a Project Project is defined as a temporary venture or efforts that are aimed to achieve some specific aims and objectives that are to be completed within specific time and within specific costs (Atkinson, 1999). In addition to this, project has also been defined by Turner and Muller (2003) as attempts using resources such as machinery, human resource and financial resource in a planned way with the aim to achieve a unique scope of work and to deliver some specific requirements within a definite duration and cost plus the project has to have a noteworthy change in either qualitative or quantitative terms or both. Therefore the definitions of project highlight that there are three important characteristics of a project; cost, scope or deliverables, and time (Jeston, and Nelis, 2008). Characteristics of Markeaton Park Project The project of investment on Markeaton Park can be termed as project because the project has specific goals, budget or cost constraints, as well as it has to be completed within a time frame which are the main characteristics of the project. All these important characteristics of Markeaton Park project are discussed: Specific Goals: There are different goals of the project; however these goals can be summarized as improving the overall condition of the Markeaton Park and to improve the facilities that are being offered by the park to the visitors. By improving these facilities, the park would be able to attract more visitors and thus it would improve the financial performance of the park and would provide sufficient funds to meet their routine needs. So with more funds, the management would be able to manage the park in a better way. Budget or cost constraint: The overall changes that have been identified are expected to cost £3.0 million (Derby City Council, 2012a). Time Frame The overall project has been divided into two different phases. The first phase of the project would be completed within 19 months. Therefore as the project of Markeaton Park meets all the three components of a project so it can be termed as a project as the project has specific goals to be achieved, has a cost constraint, has to be completed within a time frame and it would bring a qualitative or quantitative change in the park. Key Stages of the project The project of Markeaton Park has been divided into small tasks and it is presented using Gantt Chart in the appendix. GANTT CHART Success factors of the project Every project has some aims and objectives. If these aims and objectives are achieved with the cost allocated for the project and by appropriately meeting the quality standards, then such a project is said to be successful. However, if the project is not able to meet its requirements and aims and objectives then the project will be considered as a failure. Blanchard (1989) has claimed that aims and objectives of the project should be SMART. This means that the objectives should be Specific, Measureable, Attainable, Realistic and Trackable (Lewis, 2006). The investment made on the project of Markeaton Park has some objectives as well and the main aims and objectives of this project are: To protect and take care of important historical places of the Markeaton Park. To enhance and restore the overall facilities of the park such as landscape, structure, buildings, trees and gardens, surrounding regions, etc. To make the park more accessible for visitors visiting from different locations. To enhance the recreational facilities offered by the park in order to attract more visitors (Derby City Council, 2012c). To motivate the community in getting more involved in managing and using of the park in a better way (Derby City Council, 2012d). The project of Markeaton Park is although already in progress and the management of the park has been making efforts to make sure that the project is completed within the time frame, cost and with the same level of quality standards. How to Measure the success and failure of the project There are different ways to measure the success and failure of the project. However one of the ways to measure the project success or failure is by whether the project is able to achieve its objectives or not (Baker, Murphy, & Fisher, 2008). Moreover, whether the project has been able to complete within the cost that has been allocated or not. Similarly, whether the same quality standards were achieved or not. However this project is aimed to not only improve the condition of the park, but to attract more visitors to the park and at the same time offer more and better facilities to the visitors so that they are able to come to the park again and again. This would increase the revenue of the park as the visitors would become the long term customers and thus help the park in generating funds more consistently. With more consistent funds being accumulated by the park, the management would be able to better maintain the park and come up with more facilitates that could meet the needs of the visitors. The management of the park has also decided to arrange different types of events at this place and by arranging such events, more visitors will be attracted and thus it will further help the park to build up revenues. The managing will be formulating marketing strategies that would be aimed to enhance the image being portrayed and to create awareness about re-establishment and renovation conducted at the park along with additional facilities that have been added on the park. All these changes in the park would entice more visitors not only from the region of Derby but other connecting areas as well. Therefore, one of the measures that the management would be using to analyse whether the project is successful or not is by identifying and analysing the number of visitors visiting the park. Currently the number of visitors has started decreasing, but if the number of visitors start increasing then it will show that the project is successful and it has been able to attract visitors. However if the trend of declining customers remain the same, then it will show that the project is not a successful one. Black and White Framework Another framework that has been used to analyse the success and failure of a project is the black and white model. This model states that the project should have specific and clear goals and objectives and the project manager should be completely aware of what is required. If everything is certain of what the project is about and what is expected, then the project is considered to be a successful one (Ika, 2009). Relating the model to this project, the project is said to be successful because the outcomes and objectives of the project are written in detailed. The management is well aware of what is needed and what needs to be done. The objectives have been defined clearly and there is very little ambiguity about the project. Grey areas in the project are the areas that are undefined or unclear or ambiguous. However the management has divided the whole project into different parts and each part has been clearly defined of what needs improvement, what areas needs to be redesigned and reconstructed etc. Thus, the project can be said as successful. Performance measurement tools to be used The number of visitors visiting the park would be one of the main elements through which the performance of the project would be analysed. However the management also would be analysing the returns from the visitors visiting the park and then analysing the returns from the park. Therefore the incremental profits would be another important way through which the management would analyse whether the project has been successful or not (Lientz, & Rea, 2012). In addition to this, the management aims to increase the profit per visitor visiting the park as the management has not only renovated and reconstructed some facilities but new sports area and other facilities have also been added by the management to generate more revenue from the visitors. Therefore the project and the returns from the park would be analysed and the ROI would be calculated and this would be another tool that would be used to analyse the worth of the investment. Notable aspects of the project There have been several things in the project that are notable. First of the all, the project has been aimed to improve the condition of one of the most historical parks of United Kingdom. The park has its own value and the number of visitors visiting the park shows the significance of the park. Therefore the project is aimed to not only improve the park, but restore the conditions of the famous park. In terms of the project, the project does not include improvements and restoring the conditions of the park, but the management of the park has been making sure that the park is easily accessible for the visitors and they are able to go from one area of the park to the other area easily. In addition to this, the other important aspect of the project is that the management is not only concerned about improving and restoring the park but they aim to market and promote the park as well and to create awareness about the changes that have occurred in the park. Therefore, the project is not only about improving the accessibility and facilities that are provided by the park but to increase the number of customers and increase the revenues of the park so that the park is able to generate funds for a longer period of time. So the management plans to attain funds for the long run so that the park can be managed properly. One of the important aspects of the project is that the project has been divided into smaller segments and the overall project has been segregated into smaller segments or tasks. The project has been divided and this is one of the main tools of project management (Brotherton, Fried, and Norman, 2008). Not only the project has been divided into small segments, but the overall project has been broadly divided into 2 stages. The first stage of the project has been started and it aims to improve different sections of the park as well as creating activity plan to encourage people to get more involved in better managing and using the park (Derby City Council, 2012d). The second stage of the park has been named as the ‘Parks for People’ and its main objectives include; restoring the heritage value of the park, increasing the number of customers as well as the types of visitors that are visiting the park, and encouraging the community to get more involved in managing the maintenance of park (Derby City Council, 2012d). In addition to this, the management has also conducted the stakeholder analysis. The management has analysed how important stakeholders of the park can influence or can be influenced by the project (Cleland, and Gareis, 2006). Important stakeholders of the park include; the community and society, suppliers, governmental agencies, visitors of the park, NGOs like Heritage Lottery and Big Lottery Fund and competitors. Therefore these are the parties that could influence the project or the project an influence these parties. So their actions and reactions also need to be considered and analysed (Bourne, & Walker, 2005). Stakeholders have a great influence on the project and their actions could greatly hurt the project and its progress. Stakeholders particularly that have high power and high interest in the project such as the governmental agencies can greatly influence the project and its outcome. RECOMMENDATIONS TO IMPROVE THE PROJECT OUTCOMES There are different recommendations that could have improved the overall outcomes of the project. Although the project has been managed very efficiently and the management of the park has used different project management tools to make sure that the project is able to complete its tasks within the time and within the cost. This part of the report discusses important recommendations that would have improved the project outcomes. One of the important recommendations that could have improved the project outcomes is that the management should also have analysed the power and pressure of the stakeholders along with their interest in the project (Varvasovszky, & Brugha, 2000). One of the tools that have been used by project managers in this regard is the stakeholders mapping (Hamilton, 2004). Stakeholders mapping is the tool that is used to analyse not only the interest of the stakeholders in the project but also the power that the stakeholders have to influence the project. Mendelow (1997) has introduced this model to analyse the power and interest of stakeholders (Newcombe, 2003). This model has been increasingly used by project managers because of the reason that the stakeholders can significantly influence the project and its outcomes therefore identification as well as analysis of stakeholders is important (Hamilton, 2004; Fletcher at el., 2003). In order to make this investment worthwhile, the management has planned to use this investment to contribute in revenues for the long run. However there should be some project feasibility techniques or project appraisal techniques used in order to analyse whether the investment is worth making it and whether the project would yield sufficient returns or not (Munns, & Bjeirmi, 1996). This park is one of the most visited parks, and at the same time it has a historical value as well. However using of project appraisal techniques such as Net Present Value or Profitability Index would have improved the decision making of the management and it could have been analysed whether the project would yield sufficient returns or not and whether their present value is worth making investment or not (Pillai, Joshi, & Rao, 2002). Many projects look profitable and encourage investors to make the investment but when their present value is calculated, they do not show highly positive results (Del Cano, 1992). Thus it is important for the management to analyse the worth of the investment and then make the decision whether to invest or not. CONCLUSION The report has presented the project of restoring and re-establishing the condition of one of the most visited parks of United Kingdom, Markeaton Park. This report analyses the investment made on the Markeaton Park as a project and the definition and characteristics of the project have been used to analyse whether investment on Markeaton Park is a project or not. Moreover, the report also analysed the success and failure factors of the park and whether the project is said to be a successful project or not. The other important aspects of the project that are notable have been discussed in the report and it has been found that the management of the park have used different project management tools to improve the overall project and its outcomes. The report has also presented recommendations that could have further improved the project and its outcomes. Different tools such as stakeholder mapping as well as Net Present value and Profitability Index are some of the techniques that have been recommended to further enhance the outcomes of the project. Moreover, the management of the project needs to make sure that they would be able to retrieve the investment they are making on the project in appropriate time but if the payback period of the investment is too high then it may not be a feasible option to invest too much on the project. List of references Atkinson, R. (1999). Project management: cost, time and quality, two best guesses and a phenomenon, it is time to accept other success criteria. International Journal of Project Management, vol.17, no. 6, pp. 337–42. Baker, B. N., Murphy, D. C., & Fisher, D. (2008). Factors affecting project success. Project Management Handbook, Second Edition, 902-919. Bourne, L., & Walker, D. H. (2005). ‘Visualising and mapping stakeholder influence’. Management Decision, vol. 43, no. 5, pp. 649-660. Bredillet, C. (2005). “Understanding the very nature of Project Management: A Praxiological approach”, In Innovations : Project Management Research, Project Management Institute, London, Available at http://eprints.qut.edu.au/49501/1/49501.pdf [Accessed 14 February 2013] Brotherton, S., Fried, R., and Norman, E. (2008). “Applying the Work Breakdown Structure to the Project Management Lifecycle.” PMI Global Congress Proceedings: Denver, Colorado, Available at http://www.ca.com/us/~/media/files/whitepapers/fried_wbs__pmi_global_congress_202925.aspx [Accessed 14 February, 2013] Cleland, D., and Gareis, R. (2006). Global Project Management Handbook. McGraw-Hill: London. Del Cano, A. (1992). ‘Continuous project feasibility study and continuous project risk assessment’. International Journal of Project Management, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 165-170. Derby City Council. (2012a). Parks and open spaces - information and advice. Available at http://www.derby.gov.uk/environment-and-planning/parks-and-open-spaces/information-and-advice/ [Accessed 14 February 2013] Derby City Council. (2012b). Markeaton Park. Available t http://www.derby.gov.uk/environment-and-planning/parks-and-open-spaces/markeaton-park/ [Accessed 14 February 2013] Derby City Council. (2012c). Markeaton Park Master Plan. Available at http://www.derby.gov.uk/media/derbycitycouncil/contentassets/documents/consultationpapers/DerbyCityCouncil-markeaton-park-masterplan.pdf [Accessed 14 February 2013] Derby City Council. (2012d). Markeaton Park Project. Available at http://www.derby.gov.uk/council-and-democracy/consultations/your-city-your-say-latest-consultations/markeaton-park-project/ [Accessed 14 February 2013] Fletcher, A., Guthrie, J., Steane, P., Roos, G., & Pike, S. (2003). ‘Mapping stakeholder perceptions for a third sector organization’. Journal of Intellectual Capital, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 505-527. Hamilton, A. (2004). Handbook of Project Management Procedures. TTL Publishing, Ltd: London. Harrison, F., and Lock, D. (2004). Advanced project management: a structured approach‎. Gower Publishing, Ltd: Surrey. Ika, L. A. (2009). Project success as a topic in project management journals.Project Management Journal, 40(4), 6-19. Jeston, J. and Nelis, J. (2008). Management by process: A practical road-map to sustainable business process management. Butterworth-Heinemann: London. Lewis, R. (2006). Project Management. McGraw-Hill Professional: London. Lientz, B., & Rea, K. (2012). Project management for the 21st century. London, Routledge. Munns, A. K., & Bjeirmi, B. F. (1996). ‘The role of project management in achieving project success’. International Journal of Project Management, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 81-87. Phillips, J. (2003). PMP Project Management Professional Study Guide. McGraw-Hill Professional: London. Pillai, A. S., Joshi, A., & Rao, K. S. (2002). ‘Performance measurement of R&D projects in a multi-project, concurrent engineering environment’. International Journal of Project Management, vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 165-177. Turner, R. and Muller, R. (2003). ‘On the nature of the project as a temporary organization’. International Journal of Project Management, vol. 21, pp. 1–8. Varvasovszky, Z., & Brugha, R. (2000). ‘A stakeholder analysis’. Health policy and planning, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 338-345. Read More