Reasons of Failure of The Fire Control Project - Assignment Example

Overview Emergency calls from the public and all incidents are handled by one of the 46 local fire offices which send the firefighters out to the scene fully equipped. The fire chief is in charge of all the basic activity, and will also send people out to handle other daily activities such as explosions, car accidents, and other fire related incidents. The three main elements of the Fire Control are: accommodation, business change, and information technology. These three elements are to make sure that the nine offices are constructed properly, supervise all of the service change activity to all of the offices, and to also make sure all of the equipment is properly installed. There are many reasons that IT projects fail which include: lack of goals, changing the main goals in the middle of the project, no support, unprofessional time estimates, lack of professional knowledge, and lack of team work. The new control centers were suppose to be made to improve on all of the communication between the offices, as well as allowing all of them to have access to the same information to better manage all of their required duties. The department was paying for all of the costs of the new system until it was completely installed which also meant the expenses for all of the temporary equipment to ensure correct procedure. The Fire Control Project was first started in 2004 with the aim of replacing the 46 control centers with nine regional offices. The new control centers were suppose to be made to improve on all of the communication between the offices, as well as allowing all of them to have access to the same information to better manage all of their required duties. The department was paying for all of the costs of the new system until it was completely installed which also meant the expenses for all of the temporary equipment to ensure correct procedure. The regional offices were to have a national computer system that would be built by Eastern Air and Defense Systems (EADS). However, the project was completely abandoned by December 2010, because it could not be finished within a reasonable timeframe and costs continued to rise. The original estimate to complete the project was 120 million dollars and was only supposed to take five years to complete. However, by March 2009 the project had already cost 250 million and then had a new estimate of 635 million to complete. At that time the Department made a decision to stop the project in order to reduce any additional costs which could be as much as 180 million, although closing it still wasted 469 million all together. While some of the offices were built, they now have no purpose and stand empty, as the control centers were upgraded instead. Reasons for failure Project Environment One of the major reasons the whole project failed was because the Fire Control did not have enough support from its own users and stakeholders. These included the public who would benefit from the project as well as staff that would use it. The communication system with stakeholders concerning the project was poor and as consequence they were generally unaware of the decisions being made and any changes. The project was seen as a waste of time and money as there appeared to be no cohesion in decision making and management for the project was limited. Nineteen of the Fire services also let the government know that the department was not listening to any of their responses, and felt they were being completely ignored. Information was not given to the proper channels and time delays started much speculation about how well the matter was being handled. An additional problem was that when the project was designed and plans made the complexity of the project was underestimated. As a consequence, expectations were high and the plans were not sufficient to allow the project to proceed as predicted. Project Definition The way the overall project was designed was not supported by the necessary organizations. The Fire and Rescue services were not properly organized to meet the standards of the department. The project was approved based on the initial costs which was a completely wrong estimation, and it turned out to be much more complex than what they were at first admitting to. There was little to no consultation with the end users during the project planning and design. Because of this, the most efficient plan was not devised and alternatives were not developed. In the end, even after the money invested into the project it proved to be more cost effective and practical to upgrade the current control centers rather than continue with the project. As a consequence, many empty buildings are left which currently have no use . Furthermore, the planning process completely underestimated the costs and timescale that was required for the project. In part, this was due to many requirements being left out of the original plan, and most of the problems were because of the people handling the case despite of the advanced technology . In 2004 before the business case was finalized, the finalization of the control center’s IT system was taking two years longer than estimated, so it had been way off basis from the very beginning. The information had been made available to the centers before the IT system was finished, and was suppose to have the Firelink ready by 2007. The first two control centers were ready in June 2007 which was right after the IT contract had been awarded, so the equipment still was not ready to be sent for another 18 months. The company basically completely left out the cost of the regional work and the equipment installation out of the initial estimate. In 2006 the company made a more accurate estimate which including all of the staff changes, and costs they had left out at first. After this estimate was made, the cost ranged over three times the original estimate already. There were many examples of misunderstanding and communication was not working properly. There were many decision making problems occurring, and the leading force was very unclear. Project Planning / Control Management of the project was a significant problem and contributed greatly to the overall failure. The first aspect of this was that the managers were an external team that changed in composition throughout the time period. Because of this, there was little consistency. The complete planning of the entire project was a horrible disaster which had to be dealt with according to the policies of the department. One of the first approach reports by Mott MacDonald in April 2000. This report showed that it would not be much better to reduce the 46 control centers to 21 sub-regional centers, and also realized that it would not be possible to meet the previous goal which had been set. The government set out a new plan to make several regional offices in each area to better facilitate the required services. This action was actually triggered by the events of September 11, 2001 which also updated Mott Macdonald’s previous report. The new announcement of the opening of the regional offices was given in December 2003 . None of the initial plans were even completed before the first approval of the project . There was little attempt by the managers to ensure that the project remained on track or to resolve problems. Despite the large number of issues that had arisen since the projects inception, it was not until 2009 that these were addressed. Although a workshop was developed at this time to attempt to salvage the project, it was ‘too little, too late’, the false starts and problems had already severely decreased the confidence of stakeholders in the project and a large amount of money had been spent . Project Environment The project environment is the range of context that surrounds a particular project, including social, political and physical environments. Understanding and negotiating these is important for the success of any project, and they can vary significantly from one area to the next. Key factors that influence the project environment include the community and people involved, the physical environment whether it presents any obstructions, financial environment, and any political hurdles that may be present. In the case of the Fire Control Plan, important aspects of the project environment included the fact that it was essential that the fire service remained operational at all times, the command structure within the fire departments and the government legislation that was in place. For any project there are a number of different stakeholders with different needs and desires. These often conflict either with each other or with the aims of the project, and as a consequence a balance needs to be found between the different stakeholders. Some of the major stakeholders for this project included: local government, regional government, staff, and private citizens. When classifying stakeholders two factors need to be taken into account, the power that the individual stakeholder has and the level of interest they have in the project. This divides the stakeholders into four different groups, each of which can be treated with different strategies. For this project, the different stakeholders can be broken down as follows. Power High Regional Government Local Government Financial Backers EADS Low Private Citizens Staff Businesses in the Area Low High Level of Interest In order to be most effective in managing stakeholders, each cell in the above diagram can be treated differently. Stakeholders with high power but low interest need to be kept satisfied while those with low power and low interest require little effort. For stakeholders with high interest, those that also have high power are the key players and need to be worked with, communicated with and be kept in discussions, finally, those with high interest and low power need to be kept informed. Treating stakeholders in this way helps time and resources to be allocated efficiently as well as allows for clear communication. Project Definition When planning a project a useful concept is that of the iron triangle. This represents three factors that are important for any plan, the scope of the project, what it will cost and how long it will take. The triangle considers that, in order to decrease one of these factors, such as the time required, one or both of the other factors must also change. Thus, to decrease cost, the scope of the project may have to decrease, it may need to take longer, or both. Taking this into account when making plans prevents projects from running over time and over budget, by making the right allowances and decisions from the start. This concept does not appear to have been used during the planning of the Fire Control Project. This type of planning would allow a much strong estimation of costs and calculation of the ways in which to be most effective. Project Planning / Control It is important to maintain a clear and professional approach to project management. In the Fire Control case this did not occur. Instead, the constantly shifting management team meant that there was little accountability and long term plans could not be made. A professional approach looks at the problem from the beginning and systematically works through planning processes in order to determine the best solution for all parties involved. The construction of a plan involves the creation of different discrete phases or stages for the project. These individual stages are assigned time lines and budgets based on estimates of likely figures. Goals and milestones can then be set up for the stages and for the project as a whole. This allows for any problems to be identified quickly and easily, and aids in finding resolution to issues. An important aspect of this is control. Each different stage in the project needs to be controlled to ensure that it is productive and up to standard. Management needs to be involved in determining success and failure, and stepping in if something is not occurring as it should. During researching and examining the Fire Control Project I have learned a lot about project management. I was surprised at the amount of different factors that are involved in planning and managing a project and how failures in one or a few of these can have dramatic impacts on the entire project. The project progressed a long way and a lot of money was spent before it was finally halted, and as a consequence much of the resources that had been put into it were lost. The value of effective communication and planning was a lesson that I took from this study. Throughout the project, stakeholders had little idea what was going on, what the plans were and felt that their needs were not being met. The point of the project initially was to provide more efficient service and to aid the staff working there. However, although consultation with the fire departments was initiated, this was not seen to its full conclusion. Instead, plans were signed off before final consultation was made. If this was not the case, it is likely that some of the problems with the project would have been picked up before it left planning stages, and the project may have been salvageable. Had there been better communication, and more comprehensive planning many of the problems may have been avoidable. I have learned many things while researching this project. Strong management is an important part of any project, and in studying this project I have learned how much of an effect management can have overall. While the failure of the project is the responsibility of many different parties, correct leadership and management could have played a large role in averting the disaster. If the group involved in managing the project had remained the same throughout, then it is likely that they would have seen the potential problems before they happened. Finally I have learned the importance of being thorough in all stages of a project, from first idea, through development and planning to implementation. Each of these stages is important and each has the potential to go wrong in many different ways. It is important to maintain good communication with everyone involved, and make sure all decisions are known to all stakeholders. Objective management and clear goals can significantly help in determining where problems may lie, what solutions are possible and what the best decisions are each step of the way. The complete environmental setting that the project was in was a complete catastrophe. There was no mutual understanding between any of the parties, and all of the plans that were created eventually all failed. References Armour, P. 2005. Project Portfolios: Organizational Management of Risks. Communications of the ACM, 48, 17. Birch, C. 2009. Bruhn Newtech Involved in Major Uk Resilience Project. Military Technology, 33, 57-58. Freud, J. 2010. Fire Control Room Plans Seriously Flawed, Says Inquiry. Rospa Occupational Safety and Health Journal, 40, 44. Hodge, M. 2010. Fire Control Project Wasted 469 Million: Panel. International Business Times. Matthews, P. 2011. Untitled. Rospa Occupational Safety and Health Journal, 41, 6-7.  Read More