Southwestern University (a) Case Analysis

952 WordsJan 4, 20134 Pages
Southwestern University: (A) Southwestern University (SWU), a large state college in Stephenville, Texas, 30 miles south of the Dallas/Fort Worth metroplex, enrolls close to 20,000 students. To bolster its chances of reaching number-one ranking in the Big Eleven Conference, in 2003, SWU hired the legendary Pitterno as its head coach. One of Pitterno’s demands on joining SWU had been a new stadium. After the 6 months of SWU administrators’ study, Dr. Joel Wisner, president of SWU, had reached a decision to expand the capacity at its on-campus stadium. The contractor, Hill Construction (Bob Hill) was given a 270 days deadline for the project. There will be a contract penalty of $10,000 per day for running late. Hill again reviewed the…show more content…
Alternative 3: Hill would crash the project to 240 days. Pros: a) Shortened activity durations will enable Hill to finish the project by the due date. b) If missing it is about missing the deadline, this would be the least risky alternative. Cons: a) There will be an additional cost of $34,000. b) There will be a new critical path, meaning, all activities may delay the project if they will run late. Recommendation: Hill wants the project to finish early, and not just on time. Hence, it will be necessary for the project to be crashed, if he expects 75% of probability that the project will finish in 270 days. Crashing the activities would surely speed up the expected time the project will take. Meaning, the probability that the project will finish on the desired date would be higher. The group takes the second alternative as a recommendation. Crashing the project to 250 days would most likely yield a higher probability than having the target of 270 days (Alternative 1). Finishing the project earlier than the deadline will more prevent Hill construction to pay a contract penalty and avoid getting mud. Another good thing is that the additional cost in the second alternative is much lower than Alternative 3. Alternative 2 is the less risky and less costly alternative of all
Open Document