Managing Projects.ppt

7/18/2019 Managing Projects.ppt

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/managing-projectsppt 1/61

Management Information SystemsManagement Information SystemsMANAGING THE DIGITAL FIRM, 12TH EDITION

MANAGING PROE!TS

!"a#ter 1$

%IDEO !ASESCase 1 Mastering the Hype Cycle: How to Adopt the Right Innovation at

the Right TimeCase 2: NASA: ro!ect Management Challenges

Instr"ctional #ideo 1: So$tware ro!ect Management in 1% Min"tes



Management Information SystemsManagement Information Systems

• &"at are t"e o'(e)ti*es of #ro(e)t managementan+ "y is it so essentia- in +e*e-o#inginformation systems.

• &"at met"o+s )an 'e /se+ for se-e)ting an+e*a-/ating information systems #ro(e)ts an+a-igning t"em it" t"e firm0s '/siness goa-s.

• Ho )an firms assess t"e '/siness *a-/e ofinformation systems #ro(e)ts.

• &"at are t"e #rin)i#a- ris fa)tors ininformation systems #ro(e)ts.

• &"at strategies are /sef/- for managing#ro(e)t ris an+ system im#-ementation.

Learning O'(e)ti*es

!HAPTER 1$ MANAGING PROE!TS

2




• R/naay #ro(e)ts an+ system fai-/re

• R/naay #ro(e)ts 345 6 $45 IT #ro(e)ts

– E7)ee+ s)"e+/-e, '/+get

– Fai- to #erform as s#e)ifie+

• Ty#es of system fai-/re

– Fai- to )a#t/re essentia- '/sinessre8/irements

– Fai- to #ro*i+e organi9ationa- 'enefits

– !om#-i)ate+, #oor-y organi9e+ /ser interfa)e

– Ina))/rate or in)onsistent +ata

T"e Im#ortan)e of Pro(e)t Management


3



ro ec s -Postmortem

Figure 1: Summary of 2009 Standish Group CHAOS report





EO! E7am#-esEO! E7am#-es

• Standish Group (2004) collected project completionstatistics – 40,000 MIS Project in 14 to 2004 – !oss "alue is #$$ %illion in the &'S' in 2004

• Stateide utomated *hild Support S+stem (S*SS),*aliornia, 12

– e.ati"e si.nals o"er i"e +ears – The project as ultimatel+ cancelled olloin. #100 million in

direct spendin. and #/4$ million in "arious reported costs – (ecom%e, 1 eil, Mann and 3ai, 2000)

• en"er5s International irport – e"elopment o an automated %a..a.e handlin. s+stem – umerous instances o ne.ati"e eed%ac6

– 17 Month %ehind schedule – #2 8illion 9"er %ud.eted – (Monteale.re : eil, 2000)

• eil, Mann and 3ai (2000) report that %eteen /0 and 40percent o all MIS projects demonstrate some de.ree oescalation





!ONSE:;EN!ES OF POOR PROE!T MANAGEMENT

;ithout proper mana.ement, a s+stems de"elopment project ta6es lon.er to complete and most oten e<ceeds theallocated %ud.et' The resultin. inormation s+stem most li6el+ is technicall+ inerior and ma+ not %e a%le todemonstrate an+ %eneits to the or.ani=ation'

FIG;RE 1$61


7




• Pro(e)t management

– A)ti*ities in)-/+e #-anning or,assessing ris, estimating reso/r)es

re8/ire+, organi9ing t"e or, assigningtass, )ontro--ing #ro(e)t e7e)/tion,re#orting #rogress, ana-y9ing res/-ts

– Fi*e ma(or *aria'-es

1' Scope

2' Time

/' *ost

4' >ualit+

$' 3is6






• Management str/)t/re for informationsystems #ro(e)ts

– Hierar)"y in -arge firms

• *orporate strate.ic plannin. .roup – 3esponsi%le or irm?s strate.ic plan

• Inormation s+stems steerin. committee

– 3e"ies and appro"es plans or s+stems in alldi"isions

• Project mana.ement .roup

– 3esponsi%le or o"erseein. speciic projects

• Project team

– 3esponsi%le or indi"idual s+stems project

Se-e)ting Pro(e)ts


9





MANAGEMENT!ONTROL OFS<STEMSPROE!TS@ach le"el o

mana.ement in thehierarch+ isresponsi%le orspeciic aspects os+stems projects, andthis structure helps.i"e priorit+ to themost importants+stems projects or

the or.ani=ation'

FIG;RE 1$62


10




• Information systems #-an

– I+entifies systems #ro(e)ts t"at i--+e-i*er most '/siness *a-/e, -ins

+e*e-o#ment to '/siness #-an – Roa+ ma# in+i)ating +ire)tion of systems+e*e-o#ment, in)-/+es

• Purpose o plan• Strate.ic %usiness plan rationale

• *urrent s+stemsAsituation• e de"elopments to consider• Mana.ement strate.+• Implementation plan• 8ud.et

Se-e)ting Pro(e)ts


11




• In or+er to #-an effe)ti*e-y, firms nee+ toin*entory an+ +o)/ment e7isting softare,"ar+are, systems

• To +e*e-o# effe)ti*e information systems #-an,organi9ation m/st "a*e )-ear /n+erstan+ing of'ot" -ong6term an+ s"ort6term informationre8/irements

• Strategi) ana-ysis or )riti)a- s/))ess fa)tors

=!SF> a##roa)" – Sees information re8/irements as +etermine+ 'y asma-- n/m'er of )riti)a- s/))ess fa)tors

– A/to in+/stry !SFs mig"t in)-/+e sty-ing,8/a-ity, )ost

Se-e)ting Pro(e)ts


12




• !riti)a- s/))ess fa)tors

– Prin)i#a- met"o+• Inter"ies ith /-4 top mana.ers to identi+ .oalsand resultin. *SBs

• Personal *SBs a..re.ated into small num%er o irm*SBs

• S+stems %uilt to deli"er inormation on *SBs

– S/ita'-e for to# management, '/i-+ing DSS an+ ESS

– Disa+*antages

• o clear methods or a..re.ation o *SBs into irm*SBs

• *onusion %eteen indi"idual and or.ani=ational *SBs

• 8ias toards top mana.ers

Se-e)ting Pro(e)ts


13




Se-e)ting Pro(e)ts

;SING !SFs TODE%ELOPS<STEMSThe *SB approachrelies on inter"iesith 6e+ mana.ers to

identi+ their *SBs'Indi"idual *SBs area..re.ated to de"elop*SBs or the entireirm' S+stems can then%e %uilt to deli"erinormation on

these *SBs'FIG;RE 1$63


1!




• Portfo-io ana-ysis

– ;se+ to e*a-/ate a-ternati*e system#ro(e)ts

– In*entories a-- of t"e organi9ation0sinformation systems #ro(e)ts an+ assets

– Ea)" system "as #rofi-e of ris an+ 'enefit• Ci.h-%eneit, lo ris6• Ci.h-%eneit, hi.h ris6

• !o-%eneit, lo ris6• !o-%eneit, hi.h ris6

– To im#ro*e ret/rn on #ortfo-io, 'a-an)eris an+ ret/rn from systems in*estments

Se-e)ting Pro(e)ts


1"




Se-e)ting Pro(e)ts

A S<STEMPORTFOLIO

*ompanies should e<aminetheir portolio oprojects in terms o

potential %eneits andli6el+ ris6s' *ertain6inds o projects should%e a"oided alto.etherand others de"elopedrapidl+' There is noideal mi<' *ompanies indierent industriesha"e dierent proiles'

FIG;RE 1$6$


1#




D S)oring mo+e-sD ;se+ to e*a-/ate a-ternati*e system #ro(e)ts,es#e)ia--y "en many )riteria e7ist

D Assigns eig"ts to *ario/s feat/res of systeman+ )a-)/-ates eig"te+ tota-s

Se-e)ting Pro(e)ts


17

C$%&'$%A ('%GH& S)S&'* A + S)S&'* ASCO$'

S)S&'* , + S)S&'* ,SCO$'

On-ine order entry 4 67 268 73 292

Customer .redit .he./ 3 66 198 59 177

%nentory .he./ 4 72 288 81 324

(arehouse re.eiing 2 71 142 75 150

'&C

G$A &O&AS 3128 3300




• Information system )osts an+ 'enefits

– Tangi'-e 'enefits• *an %e Euantiied and assi.ned monetar+ "alue

• S+stems that displace la%or and sa"e spaceF – Transaction and clerical s+stems

– Intangi'-e 'enefits• *annot %e immediatel+ Euantiied %ut ma+ leadto Euantiia%le .ains in the lon. run

– @'.', more eicient customer ser"ice,enhanced decision ma6in.

• S+stems that inluence decision ma6in.F – @SS, SS, colla%orati"e or6 s+stems

Esta'-is"ing t"e ?/siness %a-/e of Information Systems


1

i




• !a#ita- '/+geting for information systems – !a#ita- '/+geting mo+e-s

• Measure "alue o in"estin. in lon.-term capitalin"estment projects

• 3el+ on measures the irm?s – *ash outlos

» @<penditures or hardare, sotare, la%or

– *ash inlos

» Increased sales

» 3educed costs• There are "arious capital %ud.etin. models usedor IT projectsF Pa+%ac6 method, accountin. rateo return on in"estment, net present "alue,internal rate o return (I33)

Esta'-is"ing t"e ?/siness %a-/e of Information Systems


19



Project Mana.ement noled.ereas

P j t M t



Project Mana.ementProcess



Project !ie *+cle



Defining t"e Pro(e)t



(



Pro(e)t S)o#e

• Project Scope is adeinition o theend result or

mission o +ourproject a productor ser"ice or +our

clientAcustomer'



Pro(e)t S)o#e 6!"e)-ist

• @mplo+in. a ProjectScope *hec6list

– Project 9%jecti"e

– eli"era%les

– Milestones

– Technical reEuirements

–!imits and e<clusions

– 3e"ies ith customers



Pro(e)t S)o#e

• Scope deinition should %e as %rieas possi%le %ut complete, one or topa.es are or small projects'

• lso 6non as Scope statement or

Statements o ;or6(S9;)• Project *harter authori=es theproject mana.er to initiate and leadthe project'

• S*9P@ *3@@P hich is the tendenc+or the project scope to e<pand o"ertime'



Pro(e)t Priorities

• Primar+ jo% o aproject mana.erto mana.e trade-os amon. time,

cost andperormance

• eine :

understandnature opriorities oproject



Pro(e)t Priorities

• Priority Matri7 (to identi+hich criterion is constrained,hich should %e enhanced :hich is accepted)

!reating &or ?rea+on



!reating &or ?rea+onStr/)t/re• &?S is deined asF &a

delivera'les(orienteddepiction o$ the wor)involved in a pro!ect thatde$ines the total scope o$the pro!ect*+

Su%di"idin. theproject or6 intosmaller or6elements

• ;8S- Map o theProject .i"in.dierent le"els odetail



;8S



&?S De*e-o#ment

•eine the project end item

• !ist o deli"era%les necessar+ to

de"elop end item

• !ist don su% deli"era%les or each

deli"era%le

•@ach su% deli"era%les reEuires or6pac6a.es that is to %e completed %+

the assi.ned or.ani=ational unit



&?S De*e-o#ment

•;93 P*G@ – eines or6 (hat)

– Identiies time to complete a or6 pac6a.e(ho lon.)

– Identiies a time-phased %ud.et to completea or6 pac6a.e (cost)

– Identiies resources needed to complete aor6 pac6a.e (ho much)

– Identiies a sin.le person responsi%le orunits o or6 (ho)

– Identiies monitorin. points or measurin.pro.ress (ho ell)

Integrating &?S it" t"e



Integrating &?S it" t"eOrgani9ation

Organi9ation 'rea+on str/)t/re6 O?SIt depicts ho the irm has or.ani=edto dischar.e the or6 responsi%ilit+

• Purpose o 98SF

– Pro"ide rameor6 to summari=eor.ani=ation unit or6 perormance

– Identi+ or.ani=ation units responsi%leor or6 pac6a.es

– Tie the or.ani=ational unit to costcontrol accounts



Integration ofIntegration of

WBS and OBSWBS and OBS

! +i t" &?S f t" I f ti



!o+ing t"e &?S for t"e InformationSystem

• ;8S *odin. S+stem – einesF

• !e"els and elements o the ;8S

• ;or6 pac6a.es

• 8ud.et and cost inormation

– llos reports to %e consolidatedat an+ le"el in the or.ani=ation

structure



;8S to etor6 ia.ram



Gantt *hart

R i'i-i M i



Res#onsi'i-ity Matri7

• 3esponsi%ilit+ Matri< (3M)

– lso called a linear responsi%ilit+chart'

– Summari=es the tas6s to %eaccomplished and ho is responsi%leor hat on the project'

• !ists project acti"ities andparticipants'

• *lariies critical interaces %eteenunitsand indi"iduals that need coordination'

• Pro"ide an means or all participants

to "ie their responsi%ilities anda.ree on their assi.nments'

• *lariies the e<tent or t+pe oauthorit+ that can %e e<ercised %+ eachparticipant'



Res#onsi'i-ity Matri7 for a !on*eyer?e-t Pro(e)t

ro ec ommun ca on



ro ec ommun ca onPlan





• Dimensions of #ro(e)t ris

– Le*e- of #ro(e)t ris inf-/en)e+ 'y

• Project si=e

– Indicated %+ cost, time, num%er oor.ani=ational units aected

– 9r.ani=ational comple<it+ also anissue

• Project structure – Structured, deined reEuirements runloer ris6

• @<perience ith technolo.+

Managing Pro(e)t Ris


!2

Inluence o ris6 across



Inluence o ris6 acrosstime



The 3is6

Mana.ementProcess





• !"ange management

– Re8/ire+ for s/))essf/- system'/i-+ing

– Ne information systems "a*e#oerf/- 'e"a*iora- an+organi9ationa- im#a)t

• *han.es in ho inormation is used

oten lead to ne distri%utions oauthorit+ and poer

• Internal or.ani=ational chan.e %reedsresistance and opposition



!"





• Im#-ementation – A-- organi9ationa- a)ti*ities oringtoar+ a+o#tion an+ management of aninno*ation

• !"ange agent One ro-e of systemsana-yst – Re+efines t"e )onfig/rations,intera)tions, (o' a)ti*ities, an+ #oer

re-ations"i#s of organi9ationa- gro/#s – Res#onsi'-e for ens/ring t"at a-- #artiesin*o-*e+ a))e#t )"anges )reate+ 'y nesystem



!#





• Ro-e of en+ /sers

– &it" "ig" -e*e-s of /ser in*o-*ement• S+stem more li6el+ to conorm to

reEuirements• &sers more li6el+ to accept s+stem

• ;ser6+esigner )omm/ni)ation ga#

– ;sers an+ information systems s#e)ia-ists

• ierent %ac6.rounds, interests, andpriorities

• ierent lo+alties, priorities,"oca%ularies

• ierent concerns re.ardin. a ne s+stem



!7




Management Information Systemsg y

• Management s/##ort an+)ommitment

• Positi"e perception %+ %othusers and technical sta

• @nsures suicient undin.and resources

• @norcement o reEuiredor.ani=ational chan.es



!




a age e o a o Sys e sg y

• %ery "ig" fai-/re rate among enter#risea##-i)ation an+ ?PR #ro(e)ts =/# to @45 for?PR> – Poor im#-ementation an+ )"ange management

#ra)ti)es• @mplo+ee?s concerns a%out chan.e• 3esistance %+ 6e+ mana.ers• *han.in. jo% unctions, career paths, recruitmentpractices

• Mergers an+ a)8/isitions – Simi-ar-y "ig" fai-/re rate of integration#ro(e)ts

– Merging of systems of to )om#anies re8/ires• *onsidera%le or.ani=ational chan.e• *omple< s+stems projects



!9




g yg y

• !ontro--ing ris fa)tors

– First ste# in managing #ro(e)t ris in*o-*esi+entifying nat/re an+ -e*e- of ris of #ro(e)t

– Ea)" #ro(e)t )an t"en 'e manage+ it" too-s an+ris6management a##roa)"es geare+ to -e*e- ofris

– Managing te)"ni)a- )om#-e7ity• Internal inte.ration tools

– Project leaders ith technical and administrati"e

e<perience

– Ci.hl+ e<perienced team mem%ers

– BreEuent team meetin.s

– Securin. o technical e<perience outside irm inecessar+



"0




g yg y


A GANTT !HART

The Gantt *hart in this i.ure shos the tas6, person-da+s, and initials o each responsi%le person, as ell as the start and inishdates or each tas6' The resource summar+ pro"ides a .ood mana.er ith the total person-da+s or each month and or each personor6in. on the project to mana.e the project successull+' The project descri%ed here is a data administration project'

FIG;RE 1$6


"1




g yg y


A GANTT !HART =)ontB>

The Gantt chart in this i.ure shos the tas6, person-da+s, and initials o each responsi%le person, as ell as the start and inishdates or each tas6' The resource summar+ pro"ides a .ood mana.er ith the total person-da+s or each month and or each personor6in. on the project to mana.e the project successull+' The project descri%ed here is a data administration project'

FIG;RE 1$6


"2




g yg y


A GANTT !HART =)ontB>


"3




g yg y


A PERT !HART

This is a simpliied P@3T *hart or creatin. a small ;e% site' It shos the orderin. oproject tas6s and the relationship o a tas6 ith precedin. and succeedin. tas6s'

FIG;RE 1$6C


"!




g y

• In)reasing /ser in*o-*ement an+ o*er)oming/ser resistan)e

– E7terna- integration too-s )onsist of ays to-in or of im#-ementation team to /sers at a--

organi9ationa- -e*e-s• cti"e in"ol"ement o users

• Implementation team?s responsi"eness to users

– ;ser resistan)e to organi9ationa- )"ange• &sers ma+ %elie"e chan.e is detrimental to their

interests• *ounterimplementationF eli%erate strate.+ to thartimplementation o an inormation s+stem or an inno"ationin an or.ani=ation

– @'.', increased error rates, disruptions, turno"er,sa%ota.e



""




g y

• Strategies to o*er)ome /serresistan)e

– ;ser #arti)i#ation – ;ser e+/)ation an+ training

– In)enti*es for )oo#eration

– Im#ro*ement of en+6/ser interfa)e

– Reso-/tion of organi9ationa-#ro'-ems #rior to intro+/)tion ofne system



"#




• Designing for t"e organi9ation

– Information system #ro(e)ts m/st a++ressays in "i)" organi9ation )"anges it"

ne system• Procedural chan.es• Ho% unctions• 9r.ani=ational structure• Poer relationships• ;or6 structure

– Ergonomi)s Intera)tion of #eo#-e an+ma)"ines in or en*ironment

• esi.n o jo%s• Cealth issues• @nd-user interaces



"7




• Organi9ationa- im#a)t ana-ysis

– Ho system i-- affe)t organi9ationa-str/)t/re, attit/+es, +e)ision maing,

o#erations• So)iote)"ni)a- +esign

– A++resses "/man an+ organi9ationa- iss/es

• Separate sets o technical and social

desi.n solutions• Binal desi.n is solution that %estmeets %oth technical and socialo%jecti"es



"




• Pro(e)t management softare

– !an a/tomate many as#e)ts of #ro(e)tmanagement

– !a#a'i-ities for• einin., orderin., editin. tas6s• ssi.nin. resources to tas6s• Trac6in. pro.ress

– Mi)rosoft Pro(e)t 2414

• Most idel+ used project mana.ement sotare• P@3T, Gantt *harts, critical path anal+sis

– In)rease in SaaS, o#en6so/r)e #ro(e)tmanagement softare



"9




Read the Interactive Session and disc"ss the $ollowing,"estions

• &"at are some of t"e )"a--enges Motoro-a fa)esas a '/siness. &"y is #ro(e)t management so

)riti)a- at t"is )om#any.

• &"at feat/res of HP PPM ere most /sef/- toMotoro-a.

• &"at management, organi9ation, an+ te)"no-ogy

fa)tors "a+ to 'e a++resse+ 'efore Motoro-a)o/-+ im#-ement an+ s/))essf/--y /se HP PPM.

• E*a-/ate t"e '/siness im#a)t of a+o#ting HPPPM at Motoro-aB


MOTOROLA T;RNS TO PROE!T PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT


4 5renti.e Ha-- 2011#0




All rigt! re!er"ed# $o %art of ti! %&'li(ation )a* 'e re%rod&(ed+ !tored

in a retrie"al !*!te)+ or tran!)itted+ in an* for) or '* an* )ean!+

ele(troni(+ )e(ani(al+ %oto(o%*ing+ re(ording+ or oter,i!e+ ,ito&t te

%rior ,ritten %er)i!!ion of te %&'li!er#

-rinted in te .nited State! of A)eri(a#

*op+ri.ht 2011 Pearson @ducation, Inc'

Pu%lishin. as Prentice Call


Documents

Managing Projects.ppt