One of the benefits of investing in this $100 million project includes rerouting power around bottlenecked lines. This allows Xcel Energy to deliver electricity to areas in Boulder that have a very high demand that the previous conventional electrical grid was unable to service effectively. This smart-grid system also enables Xcel Energy to detect and reduce power outages, identify false alarms more quickly and read customer meters remotely. This in return will lead to a reduction in the number of times the service crews are sent out to those locations, thus making the service crews more productive.
Combining the efficiency of the smart-grid electrical system and the reduction of outages will allow Xcel Energy to capture cost-savings more appropriately. Additionally, this electrical smart-grid allows customers to monitor their individual power use reducing household usage by up to 30% in some cases, thereby enhancing customer satisfaction. Although this may lead to a decrease in revenue for Xcel Energy, the smart-grid system enables integration of renewable generation, an increase in overall system efficiency, a more robust electrical system and an ability to recover under-utilized and wasted energy.
We can’t say for sure, but this may actually benefit Xcel Energy in the long-run as they will recover lost revenue through their decreased operational costs using the smart-grid electrical system. What conflicts do you suspect might have occurred between all the different stakeholders in this project? In any project there are four main stakeholders. This includes Client, Parent Organization, Project Team and the Public. In the case of Xcel Energy’s smart-grid project, both the client and public would be the population of Boulder, CO.
The Parent Organization is Xcel Energy and the project team includes representatives from Accenture consulting for engineering, energy industry consultants, leading technologists, business leaders and IT experts. Accenture provides consulting solutions in many major industrial sectors. According to the text, Accenture consulting for engineering was hired. Additionally, IT experts were also brought onto the team. Accenture provides IT solutions as part of their consulting portfolio so there may be some conflict between the two parties due to their different backgrounds and methods of doing business.
Also security and privacy were of utmost importance to protect intellectual property, so it is in the best interests of the project team and the parent organization to control how much information they gave to the public and local media. However, the latter of the two recipients may have wanted more information, specifically, how this affects their electricity costs and demands in the long run causing another source of conflict. Internally, members of the project team will experience conflict caused by belonging to two different teams – their project team and functional team.
Often, the head of the teams are two different people with different motives and goals, and the members have the responsibility to report to both and are therefore pulled in two different directions. The members of the project team experience almost total conflict as they compete for project resources and leadership roles. This is caused in part by the different backgrounds, attitudes and biases of each member. This would be especially apparent in the Xcel project where members from many different companies and departments are brought together, each with a unique way of accomplishing the tasks and work packages of the project.
Turning London’s Waste Dump into the 2012 Olympics Stadium Which of the “triple constraints” seems to be the uppermost here? Which constraints was Crockford trading between? The text says Crockford “quickly” assembled a project team of over 1000 individuals in order to meet the mid-2011 completion date. A constant referral to time is also observed. The start date of construction was noted as May 2008 and although there was a delay due to re-designing the roof, the text ends by stating that the project was still on track to be completed by mid-2011. Therefore, Schedule is the triple constraint uppermost here.
The design team for the 2012 Olympics Stadium planned a highly-compact field of play requiring a steel-beamed roof and on discovering that the steel-beamed roof as designed would create turbulence on the compact field, a lighter, more flexible roof was redesigned, which was made in part from recycled materials. This roof required less steel and cost less than the initial steel-beamed roof designed. Thus, Crockford traded between the Scope (Required Deliverables) and the Cost (Budget limit). Was the life cycle for this project S-shaped, J-shaped, or something else?
Considering just the purpose of the river dredging as a project itself, what was the shape of its life cycle? The completion of London’s 2012 Olympic Stadium consisted of selecting the project team (consisting of over 1000 members), cleaning up the chosen site, design of the stadium, construction, delays and finally construction until completion. Therefore, the project life-cycle most likely followed a stretched S-shape curve similar to housing construction projects. The S-shaped curve is categorized by a slow start, followed by a quick build-up and a slow finish.
This is a result of the changing levels of resources used during the successive stages of the life-cycle. The slow start in this case would be the clearing of the site and design of the stadium. Construction would also begin slowly but would quickly ramp up once all the raw materials are shipped to the location and base infrastructure completed. There is a delay (not uncommon – almost expected) when the team realizes the steel-beamed roof would create turbulence on the compact field. Finally, construction will slow down as specialized parts are ordered for the final touches (luxury spectator rooms, confectionary stands etc).
The river dredging project followed a J-shaped curve. This is characterized by a slow start followed by an exponential increase in project completion over time. Moreover, the expenditure of resources has little correlation with overall progress. The team removed 30,000 tons of silt, gravel and garbage from the river. Getting the cranes and other heavy machinery used to remove garbage from the river would take time, but once there, they can quickly and effectively remove the waste from the river. Were there any ancillary goals for this project?
What might they have been? The Olympic Delivery Authority’s goal to use recycled materials in the building of the 2012 Olympic Stadium can be considered as an ancillary goal. The use of recycled materials to build a lighter, more flexible roof creates opportunities whereby a stadium can be completely built from recycled materials in the future. An ancillary goal of making 55,000 of the 80,000 seats temporary would create a profitable stadium in the future because the cost of maintaining the area containing the seats is grossly reduced.
Furthermore, a successful stadium results in a successful 2012 Olympics and ultimately increases tourism in England. Finally, Ian Crockford has greatly increased his reputation and experience as a project manager (as well as his subordinates and parent company too) which drastically increases his chances of managing future projects on this scale and beyond. Which of the project-defining factors in Section 1. 1 were active here. The project was identified as important by the Olympic Delivery Authority composed of politicians and other high-ranking members of society.
The scope was clearly defined from the beginning of the project and was divided into sub-tasks to achieve the project goals. The due date of the project is also clearly defined as Mid-2011. Many interdependencies were at play such as the recycled metal from the police department and dredging of the river. The project was unique in that it had a temporary seating design, a lighter more flexible roof and designed specifically for the 2012 London Olympics. The budget was limited to ? 32 million and not unlike the Xcel Energy case detailed above; conflicts existed between the different stakeholders of the project. Therefore, all 7 of the project defining factors were active in the construction of the 2012 Olympics stadium.
Maladroit Cosmetics Company Which of the three choices do you recommend and why? The third choice, that is, the company that manufactures the machines can handle the installation project for a fee close to what the installation would cost Maladroit is recommended for a number of reasons. The first being hat Maladroit becomes the customer in this transaction, and the company installing the machines would be performing the job and would have to do it according Maladroit’s specifications including any unseen delays not identified in the scope. We are also unsure of the qualifications of the members of her staff and if they capable of undertaking such a high risk project worth $4 million. Finally, she cannot handle the project informally out of office because the project is very important and she would not be able to devote as much time to the project as well as her current duties.
If the project was one small machine at a total cost of $4,000, would your answer be different? Yes, we would recommend that she assigns the project to a member of her staff that could potentially be suited for a managerial role in the future. This low risk project would be an excellent test to see how well he or she is able to complete the project deliverables in a cost-effective and timely manner. Discuss the relative importance of the capital investment required versus the role of the investment in machinery.
Capital investment can be defined as a commitment of the owner’s money to land, buildings or machinery. In this example, it is the commitment of the owner’s money to the installation of 6 machines worth $4million (note: the plant manager does not necessarily own the machines, rather, the shareholders or owners of the actual company do). The role of the investment in machinery is to replace the filling machines that have become obsolete within 6 months so that the company can continue to produce cosmetic products and generate revenue.