Project Management - Building a Bridge Out of Spaghetti - Report Example

Operations Management IV: Project Management Final Project: Spaghetti Bridge University of South Australia Table of Contents Executive Summary 1 Background 2 Project Summary 2 Work Breakdown Structure 3 Plan 4 Design 4 Implement 4 Test 5 Project Time Plan 5 Risk Management 6 Conclusion/ Individual Comment 7 References 8 Appendix A – Work Breakdown Structure 9 Appendix B – Project Time Plan 10 Appendix C – Risk Analysis 11 Appendix C- continued 12 Executive Summary Project management refers to the methodical approach to planning and managing project processes from start to finish. Typically, the processes are guided through five stages, namely initiation, controlling, planning, executing and closing. The concept of project management can be universally applied in any kind of project. Indeed, it is widely used to deliver projects as well as ensure that the projects meet their ultimate success. The key constituents assumed as part of PMBOK methodology include the work breakdown structure (WBS), risk management and the project timeline (PTL). In constructing the spaghetti bridge, several methodologies were pursued to deliver a bridge to meet the required specifications as discussed in the report. Although the team was successful in meeting the deliverables, several minor challenges such as time constraints were encountered. In any case, this called attention to the need to ensure teamwork, capturing all details in the WBS, complying with the PTL and conducting risk management to mitigate inherent risks. Background This report discusses the project management methodology followed in building a bridge out of spaghetti (a cylindrical kind of pasta) and glue. To ensure the project’s success, some specifications had to be met. These included: Bridge span of 55cm Mama Mia brand spaghetti of 1 by 300 gram packet Spaghetti length 250mm Adhesive material – glue gun The project documentation included work breakdown structure (WBS), Schedule and risk management plan. The construction of the bridge was undertaken in class within a time span of 90 minutes. Project Summary The group worked through teamwork, with each member contributing significantly to the apportioned task. Teamwork and the project manager’s personality on the project performance determine the success of the project (Kliem & Anderson 1996). The members of the group included: Name Name Name Name The project documentation was focused on the risk management part of the project. Several outcomes were observed from the project: the bridge was free-standing and spanned two levels of surfaces. The support of the bridge was from the top of the level surfaces. The bridge included a decking of spaghetti to offer proper road surface across the full span of the bridge. In all, the report concludes that the team should have given much attention to WBS. During the implementation of the design plan, several weaknesses were discovered in the WBS and the implementing phase of the PTL. The first challenge involved insufficient building due to time loss. This led to working under pressure as the team hurried to finish the project. The result is that different faults and slips were observed in the end structure. In addition, even though the bridge met the specifications, it was at bare minimum. From the outset, the outcome was that the team would display model project management with reference to the spaghetti bridge. Initially, the expected outcomes included completing the bridge within the specified time. The bridges were also expected to maintain high stress to tolerance as well as maintain load weights that are higher than specified. Work Breakdown Structure Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) refers to a fundamental project management technique that delineates and organizes the entire scope of a project by means of a hierarchical tree structure (Taylor 2009). Indeed, it is a result-oriented breakdown of a project into smaller components. Therefore, it can be applied to identify what is to be undertaken in a project and the results or outcomes to be delivered. The four core components in WBS include planning, designing, implementing and testing. The first level of breakdown comprises a set of major deliverables, which can be further broken down into other deliverables (Taylor 2009). In the process of reviewing the WBS, several issues were identified that required improvements. Plan Four additional deliverables were identified under planning. For additional success, further detailing of the deliverables was proposed. Materials and tools specification required further detailing, such as investigating the bonding strengths and drying span of glue guns. Concerning risk analysis, there is a need to identify lower deliverables to outline the details required for the elements of risk assessment. With regard to time plan, since WBS does not entail time schedule, it should have been indicated at the outset at the time of creating the time plan. The research should have been broken further to detail out the designs, such as the stress load’s subsection. Design Design drawing should have been used in place of draft design with sub deliverables such as design modification, draft design and final design. Additionally, analysis of research design should have been used in place of pre study. Implement This report views that implementation deliverables could have been described by the bridge construction. Under this deliverable, sub deliverable would have included; assembly of trusses, cutting of materials, assembly of uprights and assembly of base and up support. Test The scope of the test should have been broadened to encompass the check length specification, the load test to 300 grams, and the final load test. It is however critical to observe that a single aspect of WBS was maintained. This evidences that all activities in the WBS were part of the project. Project Time Plan The project time plan entails the detailed schedule of each activity to be undertaken in completing the project. For the time plan to be effective, it needs to be achievable, realistic and logical. This can however be verified through suggestions of the members of the team to confirm that the time allocated for each task is sufficient. After reviewing the PTL (see Appendix B), there was a general consensus from the members of the team that the time allocated was indeed realistic, achievable and logical. During the practical part however, the team extended beyond the allocated time for each task. This could however be explained by the fact that the members of the team agreed that the construction was complex and lack of defined task allocation. This however had some implications as it led to the rushing of the projects. The result is that bridge became susceptible to faults. The other result is that the structure did not meet the precise design specifications. In addition, the trusses assembly was uncompleted due to time constraints. Unforeseen delays in using the materials was also experienced, more specifically the time the adhesive took to dry. There was also no time to carry out the reinforcement work (Atkinson 1999). Risk Management Risk management is an integral aspect of project management aimed at mitigating the unforeseen events that can affect the progress of the project or outcome either positively or negatively (Couillard 1995). In essence, the process or risk management involves identifying, assessing and prioritizing the project risks ahead of coordinating project resources to mitigate the impact or probability of an unfortunate incident. With respect to this particular project, the risk analysis and management comprised the strength and weaknesses of the team. In addition it consisted of the PMBOK’s efficiency in identifying different components such; as risk management planning, identification of risks, quantitative and qualitative risk analysis and risk response planning. In planning, the risks involved exploring an unfamiliar topic, time constraint, use of unfamiliar materials and architectonic leading to defective design drawing. The risks identified in design involved limited knowledge about the materials and architectonics leading to unclear cutting size and quantity. In implementing, the risks involved unclear process control leading to unclear cutting size and quantity. To mitigate the risks, risk response measures had to be applied. These included optimising on advantages of teamwork, where each member was called upon to get involved in each step that had inherent risks (Couillard 1995). Time was also generously allocated. To mitigate the risk of limited knowledge, the members performed further researches on the materials and architectonics. Peer reviews and double-checking was also done to prevent defective design drawing. Conclusion/ Individual Comment It is concluded that the project management methodology was critically significant in ensuring the bridge is built to construction. Several outcomes accrued from the project. First, the was free-standing and spanned two levels of surfaces, the support of the bridge was from the top of the level surfaces, and lastly, bridge included a decking of spaghetti to offer proper road surface across the full span of the bridge. However, it must be acknowledged that the bridge experience several faults. This was however due to failure to fully comply with WBS and carry out an effective risk analysis. The report hence concludes that failure to pay critical attention to WBS during the implementation of the design can lead to the failure of the project. Therefore, finer details such as allocation of time for each construction step are critical. The report further concludes that there is a need to undertake critical researchers of the materials used in construction to establish their qualities. For instance, the team had no knowledge of glue used leading to time constraints that affected other steps. Additionally, it can be concluded that lack of proper risk analysis almost led to the failure of the project. A number of risks such as limited knowledge about the materials and architectonics leading to unclear cutting size and quantity should have been investigated from the outset. The report therefore concludes that risk management is a critical aspect of project management that should be effectively conducted to mitigate unforeseen events that can affect the progress of the project. References Atkinson, R 1999, ‘Project management: cost, time and quality, two best guesses and a phenomenon, its time to accept other success criteria,' International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 17, No. 6, pp. 337-342 Couillard, J 1995, 'The Role of Project Risk in Determining: Project Management Approach,' Project Management Journal, viewed 8 August 2013, http://www.welchco.com/02/14/01/60/95/12/0101.HTM Kliem, R & Anderson, H 1996, 'Teambuilding Styles and Their Impact on Project Management Results,' Project Management Journal, Vol. XXVII, No. 1, Taylor, M 2009, How to Develop Work Breakdown Structures, viewed 8 August 2013,http://caldenergine.com/How%20to%20Develop%20Work%20Breakdown%20Structures.pdf Appendix A – Work Breakdown Structure Appendix B – Project Time Plan Appendix C – Risk Analysis Appendix C- continued Read More

 

Read More