The Trophy Project

The paper is divided into three sections, the first of which will establish a timeline of events. This project background will serve as a case study for the analysis in the following section that will be structured such that each of the previously mentioned facets will be independently analyzed and contrasted with project management principles. Finally the paper will conclude with a summary of the analysis and recommendations based on

Larson, E., & Gray, C. (2010). Project management, the managerial process. (5th ed., p. 158).

With the exceptional growth in technology, the present day projects are often large and complex involving a significant risk. So, a Project Management Methodology enables the delivery organization to handle these projects comprehensively, systematically and in an integrated manner, which results in strategic, tactical and operational benefits.

In the current business environment, the demand for project managers is ever growing. In short, project management is a provisional project constrained by time, cost and scope (A guide to the project management body of knowledge, 2013). Between the immense organization, optimization, and communication assets skilled project management brings to a project, it is easy to see why project management is a booming field of study. Furthermore, project management can be both financially and personally rewarding when long term milestones and goals come to fruition.

Gray, C. F. & Larson, E. W. (2008). _Project Management: The Managerial Process_. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hills Companies, Inc.

Management structure should be relooked and possibly restructured. The management structure that is currently in place is not conducive to the work function that it oversees. Before the problem can be fully understood it is important that the players and their positions be clarified.

The Trophy Project was fundamentally mismanaged from the start. The management functions of planning, organizing, staffing, controlling and directing personnel and resources were poorly executed by both senior and project level management. Customer expectations were not well defined and scope creep was allowed to take place without proper administration. There did not appear to be a corporate champion for this project who could mentor and resolve conflicts that were beyond the authority of the project manager. Plus, the project manager appeared to be inexperienced and was not very adept at negotiating with upper level and functional management to obtain the proper resources necessary to achieve the project

Development of the company’s performance management needs clarity in the areas of monitoring work progress, including the allocation of funds- both monetary rewards and funding for gaming development, and eliminating social hierarchy’s.

In the case study it is evident that the Trophy project is operating at the low consideration and low initiating structure. We will utilise the section below to table the identified problems and root causes.

Although there are signs that the company has a matrix structure in place, they do not follow a programme management approach and numerous failures within the structure exist. Their approach to management is still that of a traditional organisational approach, which tends management to lack both strategic purpose and customer focus.

3). He is preparing for the change (MERE). Second, the changes were made “We removed the entire formal organisation. We took away all departments.” (IMD international (2005) p. 4). The organisation transformed from being unmovable to be flexible and mobile (IMD international (2005) p. 1). Third, Oticon was ‘refreezed‘ with all the changes implemented. A whole new organisational structure was created with a new value and belief system and as a project-based company. Kolind believed that change was necessary for the company to succeed: “In my opinion, you must change everything at once -- organizational structure, culture, physical settings and the very nature of work itself (IMD international (2005) .p. 4) Kolind seemed to be motivated and determined about implementing changes and thought that change itself should be the mindset for everyone in the company. A part of their belief system was: “One thing is for sure: Oticon will change. We will create a flexible organisation, where everyone realizes that the only certain thing is change.” (IMD international (2005) p. 1). A reason for the successful change could be the specified focus on the formal structure. Kolind changed location, removed all doors, never allowed the use of paper and made all information within the company available for everyone. In other words, he

By: Zimmerer, Thomas W., Yasin, Mahmoud M., Project Management Journal, 87569728, Mar1998, Vol. 29, Issue 1

For these problems I would suggest that the company should implements a benchmarking and continuous improvement approach. In addition, Forefront must have a documented control procedure and the employees should be trained to be able to implement the written procedures. With a written down step by step procedure, employees should become more aware of their work and of the outcomes. If the employees have issues with the procedures, they should be discussed and revisions made if necessary.

4.2 MANAGEMENT COMMITMENT ..............................................................................................................39 4.3 POWER DISTRIBUTION AND EMPLOYEE EMPOWERMENT...................................................................... 41 ii 4.4 RECRUITMENT AND PROMOTION STANDARDS......................................................................................42 4.5 BUREAUCRACY .................................................................................................................................... 43 4.6 CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT ...............................................................................................................44

1. A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge; PMBOK Guide. 2008 Fourth edition. United States of America. Project Management Institute, Inc.