Facilitating Team Activities in a Project Management Course Joe Ashby, Indiana State University

Abstract

The use of team oriented approaches for technical problem solving has developed such that

project management can be considered a core competency for engineering and technology

students. Courses that specifically address the topic of project management allow students to

become familiar with traditional and contemporary project management practices, the use of

project management tools, and the study of human interaction within the framework of the project

team.

This paper describes the evolution of delivery methods for an engineering technology project

management course. The course brings together multiple disciplines of students and further

addresses the global issue of project teams comprised of local and distance team members. The

project management practices and tools used in the course are briefly reviewed. The educational

approaches and challenges involved in forming and mentoring a practical team project activity, in

the context of a one semester university course, will be discussed in detail. Team project topics

developed for the course will be described.

Key Words

Engineering Technology Curricula

Facilitating Team Activities in a Project Management Course

Joe E. Ashby

Indiana State University College of Technology

Course Scope

A project is a temporary activity with well defined beginning and end points, whose

purpose is to create a product or service. To fulfill the perceived need of a project within

the constraints of time, resources and desired end results, specific management

techniques are required.1 Learners in this project management course are presented with

traditional and contemporary project management concepts and tools. Key concepts

include (a) project management definitions, (b) management approaches and techniques,

(c) teaming and team leadership, (d) time management, (e) project costing and control, (f)

risk management, and (f) project closure. Project management tool use is considered,

including (a) Work Breakdown Structures, (b) Program Evaluation and Review (PERT)

charts, (c) Gantt charts, and (d) critical path management.

Course Evolution

The course titled Industrial Computer Systems Management was originally developed by

Dr. Jerry Cockrell in 1981 for the Electronics and Computer Technology (ECT)

undergraduate program. The course was developed recognizing that many graduates were

entering the workforce assuming project engineering roles and that the use of the project

as an accepted management approach was continuing to grow. In 1986 the course was

added to the graduate ECT program. During the ten year period following the launch of

the course, the continued growth of the recognition of project management as a set of

specialized procedures and tools lead to the scope of the course changing from a strict

focus on computer system management to general project management, effectively

opening the scope of the course to include classic and contemporary project management

practices.

The instructional delivery of the course, from inception, followed the instructive or

objective approach of presenting the learning material and assessing through exams and

written exercises. In an effort to add a constructivism component as described by Gagne,2

work was started in 2003 to develop a team project component for the course. The first

team projects involved problem solving in a case study format, primarily as an in-class

activity. In subsequent semesters, teams were tasked to develop learning tutorials on

topics in project management, which were delivered during class as part of the

instructional content. During the past two years the team projects have evolved into the

development of a project plan report. The steps involved in accomplishing this task

include, to: (a) learn about the technical need for a project as presented by the

stakeholders; (b) define and delimit the scope; (c) research potential paths toward a

solution; (d) evaluate the potential paths and select the best approach; (e) develop a

project plan which includes resources, equipment and materials, costs, and time schedule

estimates using standard project management tools and procedures; and (f) deliver the

written project plan report as a course deliverable with a summary oral report presented

to the class. The deliverable is a detailed plan of how to accomplish a project. The

activity does not include accomplishing the project; but fully planning the development

and execution of the project. This concept of developing a complete project plan, but not

actually executing the project, is a continuing source of confusion for some students.

However, the team project actually helps exemplify a basic tenant in project

management, that a project should be fully planned before starting the execution phase.

Typical project plan development topics have included the installation of onboard

instrumentation for the ISU drag racer, the retrofit of a snowmobile for the SAE Clean

Snowmobile Competition, a control system upgrade for an existing blow mold machine,

the installation of a robot to load and unload an industrial router, the development of a

College of Technology (COT) alumni website, and the design of a video game.

With the addition of an Information Technology (IT) program housed in the ECT

department in 2005, it was logical to include IT majors in the project management course.

IT projects often require a unique set of project management tools in order to deliver

timely and effective software solutions.3 Upon adding IT specific issues to the course

content, it was realized that there exists a common set of project management tools and

practices that are applicable to most business and industry situations. Also since the scope

of projects can bridge multiple technical disciplines, teams are often comprised of a mix

of specialists to complete a project. Following this line of logic, the course was opened to

any COT student at a junior year or higher class standing, instead of limiting it to ECT

program students.

The latest innovation in the course has been the combination of face-to-face and distance

students into the single blended class. This leverages the advantages of presenting course

material using both traditional classroom and web techniques,4 as well as responding to

the continuing and accelerated globalization of business and industry.5 Each project team

is thus comprised of a mix of distance and local students, adding the challenge of

working with geographically scattered team members in different time zones and, in fact,

different parts of the world in some cases. As distance sections of the course exist for

both undergraduate and graduate students, it was also decided to combine the bachelor

and master degree students into one course framework. This allows for the usually lesser

experienced undergraduates to team with the typically full-time employed graduate

students.

In the context of educational objectives for the course, the students will: (a) gain a firm

understanding and be able to work with key traditional project management tools and

practices as found in business and industry; (b) be successful in applying project

management tools and practices to realistic problems; and (c) be equipped to solve a

breadth of project management related issues involving human factors, business

considerations, economics, technology, and business ethics.

Course Delivery

The instructor assumes dual roles in the course. In order to equip the student with the

basic project management tools, lectures and instructive approaches are taken during the

first half of the semester. This has been accomplished by PowerPoint lectures delivered to

the on-campus students. The lecture is actually a web meeting, so distance students can

attend if possible. An Adobe Acrobat-Connect (Breeze) web meeting is opened for each

class lecture, as shown in Figure 1. The PC screen is projected on an overhead in the

classroom, allowing on-campus students to view the lecture slides along with chat

comments from distance attendees. Each web meeting is archived and the link posted in

the Blackboard course website. The archive is available for those distance students who

can not attend the real-time lecture, as well as for

Figure 1. In-class lecture web meeting using Adobe Acrobat-Connect.

all students to review the lecture as they desire. A small number of lectures are also

posted via Adobe Presenter (Breeze Presenter) which allows for PowerPoint slides with

audio to be used as tutorials on specific topics such as project costing and document

formatting for the project plan report assignment.

As the team activities commence, the instructor must then assume the role of engineering

manager and in many cases stakeholder. Stakeholders have also been brought into the

project activities, particularly in the automotive and IT oriented projects which are

outside the course instructor’s field. Most recently in the case of the COT alumni web site

project, the COT alumni director assumed the role of stakeholder. This made for an even

more realistic project activity in that the final deliverable proved to be a useful tool from

which a college focused alumni website many develop.

One of the best enhancements in the team formation process has been to post potential

project topics and allow students to state their first, second and third preferences. To aid

the instructor in making team personnel assignments, students submit a resume which is

posted in the course web site. Posting the resume also helps the team members become

acquainted. Graduate students are tasked with team leader roles. This carries the added

responsibility of coordinating all of the activities involved in the project plan

development process. Based on the collective class size, there may be more than one

team leader per team. Each team must also have a mix of distance and on-campus

members. The desired situation is to have one distance and one local team leader.

Typically teams consist of five to eight members, including the leaders.

Communication within the team is accomplished in a variety of ways, at the team’s

discretion. Standing Adobe Acrobat-Connect meeting sessions are opened for each team,

so at any agreed-upon time the team can have a web meeting. Web camera use is

encouraged, but many students simply use audio. A few wayward students insist on using

text chat. On-campus students have access to PCs set-up for web meetings so they can

attend as a group. Since local and distance team leaders exist on each team, a division of

the project plan development tasks and a somewhat parallel approach is used by some

teams. This arrangement can work well if the team leaders are well coordinated.

Communication exclusively by e-mail is the most cumbersome way to communicate.

Teams that have members, and particularly leaders, that are three or more time zones

away from the balance of the team are forced into e-mail use. In this case the number of

e-mail transactions seems to be inversely proportional to the quality of the execution

plan. E-mail over-load is common.

Attempts are made to make the team exercise and the class activities realistic work

environments. Professionalism is expected, particularly in written communication

including e-mails. Instant message worded e-mails are summarily rejected by the

instructor. Team meeting minutes are required to be posted on the course website with

each team having an assigned discussion thread. The course syllabus is organized in the

form of a specification. The project plan deliverable has a pre-defined set of sections,

which include: (a) cover page, (b) table of contents, (c) executive summary, (d) team

profile, (e) project requirements, (f) technical approach, (g) project execution plan, (h)

methodology, (i) project cost evaluation, (j) risk considerations, (k) project closure plan,

(l) summary and, (m) attachments. Grade scores are equated to awards in dollars, with

$5000.00 being the award for 100% credit. The instructor pays $25 spot bonuses for

thoughtful questions and innovative ideas.

As stated, graduate students are assigned to the team leader roles. Many in the program

have industry experience and do quite well. However, it is an error to assume that every

team leader will automatically know how to effectively manage a project team.

Essentially, the team leaders should develop a project plan and schedule for the team in

order to be effective leaders. During the past semester the team leaders were required to

develop a milestone schedule for the team, for review by the instructor, prior to

organizing the team. This appeared to help some team leaders, but better team leader

training is needed; noting that it must occur in a brief time period during the beginning of

the semester.

Assessment is accomplished via two exams, two assignments and a two-component grade

for the team deliverable. The assignments typically involve posting their personal work

resume and a research paper that addresses a topic in the project management field. Each

learner is graded on their individual deliverables to the team project as well as the overall

quality of the team’s project submission. The project assessment process is a difficult task

for the instructor since most of the project work is performed outside the confines of the

classroom. A review of the discussion threads and team meeting minutes show evidence

of individual team member performance. The team leaders are encouraged to involve the

instructor if team members fail to deliver on-time or miss consecutive team meetings.

While students are made fully aware of their responsibilities to the team project at the

beginning of the semester, a small number are fired from teams due to lack of

participation. While most graduate students do reasonably well in the team leadership

role, some foreign graduate students have difficulty assuming the role of team leader due

to language or cultural issues. In a few cases teams have been disbanded. A considerable

amount of the instructor’s time is spent on team management and personnel issues during

the project execution portion of the course. The management of six to eight teams is a full

load for one instructor during a semester.

Conclusions

The quality of work furnished in the project plan report team projects is relatively high.

On average 25% of the teams earn A grades, 40% of the teams receive B grades, and 35%

of the team receive average to below average grades. Approximately 85% of the team

leaders perform satisfactorily or better in their roles. In terms of assessment outcomes,

there is an observable correlation between individual team project scores and final exam

scores. Students who receive a low score on their team project individual deliverable also

show lower final exam scores. It seems reasonable to conclude that students who invest

work in the course will see the results of their work reflected in higher grades. Also, it

seems logical that the project experience in the course results in higher final grades, but

statistical analysis on this possibility has yet to be accomplished.

During the period since team activities were added to the course, the number of COT

students taking the project management course per school year has increased from 48 to

89. This represents an 80% growth in the course, while the enrollment in the ECT

program remained flat. The IT and Computer Integrated Manufacturing degree programs

have made project management a required course. The Mechanical Engineering

Technology, Automotive Management, Industrial Technology and Supervision programs

have added the course as an elective.

Student responses to semester-end Likert scale surveys were reviewed, comparing the

school year prior to adding team activities to the average of the five years following the

change. In response to the question, “Were the assignments helpful in understanding the

course material?”, there was a 14% increase. In response to the question: Did this course

actively involve you in learning?, there was a 17% increase.

The number of students taking the project management course has grown to a level that

would support a dedicated full time instructor. The ideal candidate for the job should be

Project Management Institute (PMI) certified.

In order for our technology graduates to work effectively in the project oriented

environment of today which involves teamwork, timelines and budgets, it seems essential

that they receive exposure to classic project management principles.6,7

The course

described in this paper is showing success at accomplishing this in the College of

Technology at ISU.

Bibliography

1. Whitt, M.D. (2006). Project Management and Execution. In V.L. Trevathan (Ed), A guide to

the automation body of knowledge (pp. 413-430). Research Triangle Park, NC: ISA.

2. Driscoll, W.P. (2000). Psychology of learning for instruction. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

3. Marchewka, J.T. (2006). Information Technology Project Management. Hoboken, NJ: John

Wiley and Sons, Inc.

4. Rosenberg, M.J. (2001). e-Learning, strategies for delivering knowledge in the digital age.

New York: McGraw-Hill.

5. Friedman, T.L. (2007). The world is flat: a brief history of the twenty-first century. New York:

Picador.

6. Kotnour, T. & Camci, A. (2006). Technology complexity in projects: does classical project

management work? In proceeding of PICMET 2006 (pp. 2181 – 2186). Istanbul, Turkey: IEEE.

7. Patah, L.A., de Carvalho, M.M. (2007). Measuring the value of project management. In

proceeding of PICMET 2007 (pp. 2038 – 2042). Portland, OR: IEEE.

Joe E. Ashby is an Assistant Professor at Indiana State University, College of Technology, in the

Electronics, Computer and Mechanical Engineering Technology department. He entered the teaching

profession in 2003, after a 28 year career as an automation engineer. Ashby is currently seeking a PhD in

Computing Technology in Education from Nova Southeastern. E-mail: jashby@isugw.indstate.edu.