Project Context and Delivery Environment - Case Study Example

Project Management Date Lecturer Course Project Context and delivery environment Mission statement The project is committed to integrate knowledge and skills among the participants in the tour and later across the school by sharing them. This will reduce inefficiency and effort duplication and streamline concert activities in support of dynamic learning goals. Scope The main learning objective of the project is to promote new skills necessary for the support of revitalizing concert across the school. The skills will assist the staff, parents and particularly student community to meet the concert band needs and broader community expectations. Specifically, the tour involves the use of project methodology and associated guidance to design and implement a tour to: Assist in selection and planning for countries and activities for the tour that will be linked to the school concert band needs. Create concert-based specific subjects, topics activities that will be merged with the school, regional and national concert version: a number of general activities for coverage of theoretical and practical learning are needed. Implement the merged activities among the students, staff and parents on tour and train them in their use. Come up with concert specific activities based on the school classification system that can be used to create various events in the school concert-band. Assist in identification of procedures and concert band management tools which are required to support the above activities. It is expected that the implementation of the learnt skills in the tour will occur immediately after the 18 days tour, so it will not be a part of the project scope. Requirements definition Stage 1 there will be need for assistance from concert-based teachers to gain access to most suitable countries. Stage 2 involves discussion with students’, parents’ and staffs’ representatives to confirm the range of activities that are adequate. This will further combine consultations from national concert planners. Stage 3 involves discussions with stakeholders groups to discuss about the resources requirements and sources, set deadlines for preparation activities and indicate the necessary training for all the participants. Overall implementation The potential and most significant environmental difficulties in this tour might arise from lack of communication, inadequately defined project outcomes, lack of quality control, inadequate definitions and planning of roles and responsibilities, inadequate or poor co-ordination of resources. Technical difficulties The stakeholders may have an ever-changing requirements and approaches to the tour The relevant persons such as parents, staff and official agents can be slow with communications Project activities may not start on time which might affect the milestone The point of contact including the persons in the country to visit may not care about the project Too much time may be spent solving problems after kicking on the project Significant restraints Poor costs and duration estimation leading to preparation taking more time and costing more than expected. Inadequate definition and acceptance of tour roles and responsibilities leading to poor decision-making and lack of direction Inadequate plan and co-ordination of resources Resources Availability There might lack the expected parent funding or inadequate funds after the community funds drive. The school would then see the tour as a burden to fund in all its activities or the committee might extend the duration for preparation to seek for adequate resources. The resource for planning activities such as meetings, preparation of reports, communication and transport may be too little to allow comprehensive planning. Unforeseeable resource needs might arise during the tour which can affect the completion of all scheduled activities. People issues The tour impacts on various stakeholders including the teaching staff, parents and students in the school. Negotiations and discussions of the best way to select, the functions and activities in the tour might take time to agree. Some staff on board may experience difficulties as they adjust to key roles needed during the tour. Managing expectations is another difficulty involved as some stakeholders may expect too much and they may react negatively if the results are not what they expected. The preliminary details of the school reveals that there has not had a previous tour and this will need a tight control for the tour to succeed. There is great deal to be achieved within 6 months of preparation. Despite the best intentions, the plan may blow out due to new responsibilities, revision of tour details, need for more staff consultations, and waiting for executive team approval and there is no scope for contingencies including illness. Stakeholder analysis Part 4: Event Project Integration and Planning Project Stakeholder Analysis Students Teachers Sponsors Library staff Faculty director Campus director Security officers The authors Project advisory group or project control group is required in order to link all the stakeholders of this project, more so to liaison among the external stakeholders on behalf of the organizing students. Relationships Teachers and students Students and teachers work together closely in order to ensure that they are on board with the project and more so to promote some events to the business faculty of the campus. The teachers will also assist in the preparation of meetings by attending meetings. The faculty director and the project advisory group The faculty director is the one who authorizes use of facilities and therefore being kept informed is very important. Committee membership The membership of the committee will comprise the organizers of the project, campus director or representative, faculty director, students and teachers. Strategies for communicating to the stakeholders Consultations Meetings interviews Conversations Conference calls Emails Project organization structure chart Sponsors and students The students needs the sponsors to provide them with financial support for the project while the sponsors needs to be kept informed and manage closely at all times. Project organisational structure Ekvall, G. (1996) states that this is used for helping in completing tasks in a project, expansion and growth, reporting relationships and for communication of information in the project, information flow is very impor2tant in an organization success. A well designed organization structure aids in completion of projects. It spots strong points as well as weaknesses in the project and consequently are deliberated on. Work breakdown structure The work breakdown structure is used a show the number of processes and more specifically to provide subsidiary plans for formulating project management plan in the organization as D'arrigo& Smith (1998) explains. It’s a hierarchy of decomposed components of the project that define and organizes the total scope of the project. It’s a representation of the detailed scope statement of the project. It specifies the work to be simplified by the project. The WBS describes the elements of the structure; it includes the list of all associated activities, statement of work and milestone list. The WBS also includes other information such as faculty responsible, the starting and ending dates, quality requirements, resources required and the estimates of the costs among other information. Responsibility and accountability The teacher is responsible for promoting and enlightening the students on the developments on how the project is faring. The faculty director, being part of the campus management, have a responsibility of providing all what is required by the project team in order to make it successful. Though the publisher has initial contacts only, he has a responsibility of arranging the availed data from the project, though as time approaches his role is more expounded. Lastly, the sponsors are a very important part of the project, their inputs in terms of finances and time. Without some sponsorship some students may fail to cooperate and coordinate at all. This is not forgetting the assistance accorded by the campus director whom permeation to carry the project is very provided. Responsibility Ekvall, G. (1996). Organizational climate for creativity and innovation. European journal of work and organizational psychology, 5(1), 105-123. D'arrigo, C. S., & Smith, D. E. (1998). U.S. Patent No. 5,848,394. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Read More