Project Management - Work and Organizational Breakdown Structures - Assignment Example

Project Management Name of the Customer Course Lecturer 6th May, 2012. Introduction Organizational projects are projects which are intended to attain or achieve the organization’s strategies and hence very important to the organization and should be wholly connected to the host organization which they are designed to help attain strategies. This also ascertains the saying by Pinto (p.53) that ‘the organization itself matters’ and hence the environment for instance culture of the organization, structure and the strategy of the organization are important factors to consider while discussing the reasons as to why project managers should ensure that their projects are connected to the host organization in addition to discussing the challenges that they may face while connecting the projects to the host organizations. Culture To begin with, organizational culture generally refers to the culture that people in the organization conform to, that defines the personalities of employees in the organization and collaboratively represents the character of a certain organization in other words, the way things are done in a particular organization (Cleland & Ireland 2007, pp. 45). Therefore, organization culture is observable and a very powerful force to reckon with in the organization for an organization’s culture is crucial in determining whether an organization achieves the strategies being sought to be achieved through projects in the organization. Organizational culture affects organizational projects in that, culture affects the way departments in the organization are supposed to interact and show support towards each other pursuant of the goals of the project. The organization’s culture of how departments in the organization relates to each other dictates the way the departments in the organization are to join hands and support a certain project in the organization in light of achieving the strategies the project is supposed to achieve for the organization. Where there is a culture of employees working together regardless of the departments they are in, in attaining the set goals and strategies of the organization, it is definite that such an organizational culture will aid project managers in achieving the desired goals that their projects are supposed to attain and hence link their projects to the host organization for the support that the projects needs from the employees. It also gives the project managers the confidence in drafting the objectives and the strategies that projects should accomplish for there is the culture of teamwork in the organization but the vice versa is also true. Hence in linking the projects to the host organization, there are no surprises that are to be experienced as to the outcomes of the projects in light of organizational culture (Bligh 2006, pp. 397). Culture also influences the way employees commit to achieving the goals desired in a specific project. Organizational culture comes into play in dictating how employees are to work towards achieving the goals of the project. An organizational culture of employee’s commitment to the attainment of the objective of goals and aims of the organization will be no different when it comes to showing the same level of commitment towards the projects in the organization. Culture also influences project planning processes and the way work is to be estimated, how resources are to be allotted to projects in the organization. For instance, an organizational culture where employees are corrupt will result in misappropriation of resources in the various organizational projects. Lastly, culture also influences the way project managers are to evaluate the performance of the project teams and how the project managers view the outcomes of the project teams. A culture of always having exemplary work goes a long way in urging the project managers not to accept substandard work from the project teams and hence employees will always do the best for the organization. From the above discussion, it is undisputable that in determining the success of projects, management and the design of projects in the organization, projects managers are to link their projects to their organizations so that the expectations of what the projects are supposed to achieve for the organization is measured against the blueprints of the culture in the organization (Phegan 1996, pp. 90). For instance, where there is absence of teamwork of employees, project managers should not be overly expectant that employees are to be enthusiastic in the projects within the organization. Structure of the organization Organizational structure refers to the hierarchy of the organization which dictates the way authority flows in the organization, the processes of information flows, the allocation of responsibilities and duties, delegation, coordination and control of powers, duties and the various responsibilities in the organization (Gray & Larson 2008, pp. 23). Though the structure of the organization can be changed, it affects the success of projects in the organization. Organization structure affects the way duties and responsibilities to the projects are delegated. For instance, in a small organization, there may not be enough staff to oversee different projects in the organization and some employees may have to work on consecutive projects at a go and hence lesser commitments to the projects. Organizational structure also impacts on the way resources are shared out in the organization, for instance, where there is a decentralized structure, the execution of the various projects is decentralized and so is the sharing of the resources done in a decentralized manner and in accordance to the resources that are enough for a particular project. In comparison, a centralized organizational structure will imply that resource allocation is at the top management and this may pose a problem in that top management may allocate equal resources to all projects and the projects may not be carrying equal weight in terms of resources. Therefore, project managers in linking the projects to the host organization should consider issues of organizational structure for the structure of the organization determines the success of the projects (King & Cleland 1986, pp. 23). For instance, in a decentralized structure organization, the delegation of roles and responsibilities that employees are to play in the projects, the allocation of resources is done at a departmental and personal level because every department in the organization wants to emerge the best as opposed to where the roles and responsibilities, duties of employees in the projects and information regarding the project is centralized to the extent that when the duties to a project are being allocated, the top management may not even be aware of the various components of the project that requires more employees. Centralization only works in attaining blanket strategies in the organization as opposed to when there is decentralization in the organization and therefore different departments have their own projects and hence better outcomes. In addition, while deciding the projects the organization is to undertake in attaining the organization’s objectives, emphasis placed on the project’s position in accordance with the structure are important and thus makes projects in those positions vital and which ones are mediocre and thus least important. Therefore, there is no way that organizational projects are to be disconnected from their host organizations. Organizational structure also offers a company insight on how to forge forward in developing, pursuing, and executing the missions in the projects in order to ensure that there is growth in the organization. In this regard, project managers must always look at the type of structure in the organization and hence the need of projects in the organization to be connects to the host organization. Organizational strategy The strategy that is adapted by an organization helps the organization to identify the ways in which various factors are to impact on the organizational projects and also works in strategizing future strategies and tactics in making the projects a success (Jaafari 1986, pp. 32). For instance, the automobile industry in the USA in light of projects of designing cars that are to increase the sales in the automobile industries in US, had to adopt strategies for instance, the design of cars which cut costs in terms of the fuel that they consume and design cars taking less time to manufacture. Another example is the Japan’s Nissan Company which in light of considering establishing a plant in the USA, had to consider strategies that were to face the development of a plant in USA for instance, how the local community was to adapt to the idea of having a foreign organization in their country. This was effectively tacked through managing employee relations so that the diverse workforce of employees could well integrate with the locals. This shows that for a project to be successful, the strategy that an organization adopts in executing a project is important for it determines whether the project will succeed or not. Therefore, the success attributed to a particular project by project managers is wholly dependent on the strategies of the host organization, for example, were it not for the strategy of the Japan Nissan Company to address issues of employees relations in USA, the establishment of the plant in USA would not have succeed and this further shows that organizational project’s success is wholly dependent on the host organizations. A challenge that may arise in connecting a project to host organization includes issues related to stakeholders with the most affected stakeholders of the organization being the employees, managers and promoters of the organization. A classic example of a common problem is how to change the culture of employees, managers and promoters of the organization so that the culture that is in the organization shifts from being defined as “the way things are done in the organization” to “working towards achieving organizational objectives, aims and strategies” so that projects in the organization can succeed (Cleland 1990, pp. 23). To say that it is a challenge is an understatement but nonetheless something that can be attained. Question 2 SOW (Statements of Work) Statements of work refer to formal documents in the organization that clearly defines the activities that are to be carried out, the deliverables and the time plan for attaining the activities (Lewis 2006, pp. 55). The major areas that are involved in an SOW involves the purpose of a project, that is the specific purpose that the organization is trying to achieve in undertaking a specific project, the scope of the project, location where the project is to be carried out and the specific time the project will be underway (BERR n.d., pp. 5). Others include, the deliverable, for instance, in the various steps of the projects, the amount of work which is due at a specific time, the special requirements of the projects among other issues that are considered in an SOW. In consulting the duration for which the project will be underway, SOW are consulted to give the specific time that the project is to end for one of the purposes of SOW is that they give out clearly the time plan that a certain project in the organization is to take place (Joseph 2003, pp. 45). In a simple project life cycle, for instance in figure 1a, SOW lays in the phase of project initiation where issues regarding the specific purpose of the project are clearly laid out, the rime plan, the requirements of the project, scope and location of the project among other activities to be carried out during project design and management (Chartfield n.d.). SOW helps in resource allocation through giving out the requirements for the project and hence when exact requirements of the project are given out, there is less wastage because there is no second guessing of what might be required to successfully execute a project. In addition, when all the requirements in terms of resources are known, it is cheaper to buy them because, the organization maybe given quantity discounts when the resources required in the project are purchased in large quantities other than when there are purchased in small quantities. Through SOW, risks for instance, lack of prioritization of project resources is avoided hence when starting the project, the organization has all the resources that are required. Consequently, in budgeting for the resources that are required in the project initiation stage, an organization is enabled to stay within its reach, for instance avoid under budgeting and over budgeting of the project and hence successful project closure failure of the issues not being properly addressed the project can collapse (Joseph 2003, pp. 15). WBS (Work Breakdown Structures) In WBS, the project is divided into components but the components are related or linked to the total work that is to be carried out in the project in the organization (Westney 2001, pp. 128). WBS in project planning and management operates on the principle that the whole that constitutes the parts is more complicated and therefore breaking the whole into constituent’s parts that will eventually make the whole when the project is complete is easy. WBS helps in estimating the costs applicable to the various components of the project and also in helping to attain control of the whole project along with guiding and scheduling the execution of various activities in the project. WBS also divides what is to be achieved in the organization in chunks which are manageable in the team for it would prove a great deal of work to project teams if there was no breakdown of work into structures. In the cost controlling or for the accurate facts of the costs involved in the project, WBS will give a clearer picture. Overall control of organizational projects is also achieved through the consultation of the WBS. WBS falls in the phase of project planning in the project life cycle in that it is in this stage where the roadmap of how the various activities in the project are to be achieved falls. It is also through WBS that issues regarding planning are tackled for instance, developing project plans, resource planning, financial plans, communications plan, issues with project execution are also tackled, contracting the suppliers and building of deliverables among others (Patel & Prof 1999, pp. 52). WBS helps in proper resource allocation without any wastage for instance, what is allocated to a certain project component is what is required to complete that component of the project. This in turn adds to proper budgeting of resources in the organization when project resources are being budgeted, they are budgeted for a specific component of the project rather than blanket budgeting for all the components of the organization hence less wastage (Black 2003, pp. 12). In risks management, when the project is divided into the various components, the risks inherent to a particular component in a project are not generalized to the rest of the project components and the risks become easier to manage and identify. In project closure, the way the project is divided into component is an ingredient to the way project tasks are to be executed and hence determine the success or the collapse of the project (Harrison & Lock 2004, pp. 50). OBS (Organizational Breakdown Structures) OBS works concurrently with WBS in that OBS groups the various WBS (small project components) and links the components to the organizational structure and hence the importance of a detailed WBS before executing the OBS. Therefore activities, such as project management, billing, project budgeting, control in the project, reporting of project costs falls under the doctrine of OBS (the links of the project’s component to the organizational structure). In executing OBS during project planning and management, the tasks in WBS are mirrored in such a way that in the structure of WBS, the key categories are assigned to major committees in the organization and the lower categories of work are assigned to the lower level committees. In carrying out the various activities in the project, the project manager is at the top of the level so that he or she can oversee the various activities being carried out in the components of the project and also coordinate the components to make the whole project. In a project life cycle, the OBS falls in the phase of project execution (Chartfield n.d.). Project execution in this stage involves the control of the various activities which have been broken down from the main project so that they can be easily executed and delivering quality in terms of attaining project aims. This is also the stage whereby, the projects teams collaboratively contribute to their teams so that what is desired in the project can be achieved (Frame 1998, pp. 238). OBS also falls in the phase of project closure where staffs are released and the review of the project is done so that the project can finally be implemented. When the various components of the project are linked to the structure of the organization, it becomes easier for the organization to control the components other than controlling them as a whole. Budget allocation and estimates of the components of the projects to the various structure of the organization is also simplified and hence in the project closure, for instance, in a decentralized organization structure where there is easier allocation and estimation of the costs of the project, the project becomes a success (Paul et al. 2005, pp. 25). Figure 1 a, Figure 1a, Simple Illustration of a Project Life Cycle in order to illustrate the roles played by SOW, WBS and OBS. References Black, R. J. 2003, Organizational Culture: Creating the Influence Needed for Strategic Success, London UK. Bligh, M. C. 2006, "Surviving Post-merger ‘Culture Clash’: Can Cultural Leadership Lessen the Casualties?" Leadership, vol. 2: pp. 395 - 426. Chartfield, C. n.d., “A Short Course in Project Management” Microsoft. Retrieved on 6th May, 2012. Retrieved from http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/project-help/a-short-course-in-project-management-HA010235482.aspx. Cleland, D.I. & Ireland, L.R. 2007, Project Management: Strategic Design and Implementation, 5th Ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies. Cleland, Dr. D. I., 1990, Project Management: Strategic Design and Implementation, TAB Books, PA. Frame, Dr. J.D., 1998, Closing Out the Project, chapter 14 of Project Management Handbook edited by J. K. Pinto, Jossey-Bass. Gray C. F, & Larson E.W. 2008, Project Management: The Managerial process, 4th Ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies. Guidelines for Managing Projects from the UK Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR). n.d., Retrieved on 6th May, 2012. Retrieved from http://www.berr.gov.uk/files/file40647.pdf Harrison, F.L. & Lock, D. 2004, Advanced Project Management: A Structured Approach, 4th Ed. Aldershot: Gower Publishing Limited. Jaafari, A. 1986, “Strategic Issues in Formulation and Management of Macro projects in Australia,” International Journal of Project Management, vol. 4, no. 2. Joseph, P. 2003, PMP Project Management Professional Study Guide. New York: McGraw-Hill Professional. King, W. R. & Cleland D. I. (1986), Strategic Planning and Management Handbook. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold. Lewis, R. I. 2006, Project Management. New York: McGraw-Hill Professional. Patel, M. B. & Prof. P.G. W. 1999, Morris, Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge, Centre for Research in the Management of Projects, University of Manchester: UK. Paul, C. D. et al. 2005, The right projects done right! New York: John Wiley and Sons. Phegan, B. 1996, Developing Your Company Culture, a Handbook for Leaders and Managers, Context Press Westney, R. E., 2001, Risk Management: Maximizing the Probability of Success, in Project Management for Business Professionals, eds. by Joan Knutson, NY, Wiley. Read More