PROJ6003 Project Execution and Control

FIND A SOLUTION AT Academic Writers Bay

PROJ6003 Project Execution and ControlAssessment Case Study20211* The contents of this Case Study were adapted from a real case to suit the requirements of the PROJ6003 subject’s assessments and are theproperty of Torrens University Australia.Department Asset Management System – DAMS ProjectBackgroundThe organisation is a large state-based government department in Victoria with assets andstakeholders throughout the entire state of Victoria. This project is to deliver an Asset ManagementInformation System which will store the details of all new and existing assets, which include land andbuildings across multiple locations. We will call the system DAMS, Departmental Asset ManagementSystem. The DAMS System replaces over 20 department asset management systems and manualprocesses, including systems written in MS Access, Excel and Lotus Notes. Due to the number of assetsand divisions within the department, it was decided that the system would be developed and deployedover a three-year period, with three separate deployments.The project was purchased on the basis of responses to a tender, and the successful supplier was anexperienced vendor, who had previously delivered this application to other state government-basedagencies. We will call the vendor Great IT Systems (GIS). The contract was approved as a fixed pricecontract, using the Requirements Specification document from the Tender as the agreed basis forcosting. The contract allows for changes to specifications and requirements at a fixed hourly rateaccording to the rate card.The CoTS (Commerical Off the Shelf) software solution was purchased for a cost of $5.5M plusimplementation and training costs. Training development and delivery was quoted at a cost of 500days at a daily rate of $1000 per day. Implementation costs, including requirements analysis,customisation and system testing were charged at $3M. Hardware and infrastructure was purchasedat a cost of $4.5M. Total cost of the project is recorded as lifecycle cost, whick includes ongoingmaintenance during the life of the program, generally made up of the initial contract plus twoextensions of the initial contract. Changes and additions to scope are based on the rate card (Appendix1)The initial intention was that the selected application would be implemented as it was, out of the boxand with minimal customisation. The business users would need to change their ways of working tofollow the processes that are introduced via DAMS.Project TeamThe current vendor Project Manager has successfully delivered many projects and is well known forher Stakeholder Management and Project Delivery skills. We will call her Lee. The current departmentProgram Manager is a consultant with many years of experience, but has only recently joined thedepartment on a contract basis, specifically to deliver the DAMS Program. We will call him Mark. Glennis a Project Manager, who reports to Mark, and has also joined as a consultant. Glenn has worked withthis department previously as a consultant, and has delivered a number of applications, includingAssetMan which will now be replaced by DAMS.A Business Analyst has also been allocated to the Program. He comes from within this governmentdepartment and has worked in an IT delivery role for six years, He too has implemented AssetManand knows Glenn well. We will call him Martin.Recently, a Project Officer, Teena, has joined the Project Team. Her role is to schedule and managemeetings and training dates. Teena is an experienced Project Manager who has worked for manygovernment organisations and understands how to communicate effectively with the keyPROJ6003 Project Execution and ControlAssessment Case Study20212* The contents of this Case Study were adapted from a real case to suit the requirements of the PROJ6003 subject’s assessments and are theproperty of Torrens University Australia.stakeholders. Teena is present in all meetings and in all training sessions. Teena feels that she isunderutilised and that Mark is not taking advantage of her skillset. She also feels that Lee is using heras the scapegoat for any issues that are coming to light. Teena is not included in the Project SteeringCommittee Meetings, which frustrates her, as most of the Project Team and stakeholders come to herfirst with any questions or problems.The organisation has allocated Subject Matter Experts to the Program, with the expectation that thesolution will satisfy all of their needs, and that all staff will use the full system once it has beendelivered. The Subject Matter Expersts are specialists in their area of work, with a number ofstakeholders allocated to a super user role. This role allows them to create new users, and updatenew code tables according to the needs of the teams and applications.The key internal stakeholders, especially the Subject Matter Experts, who have been seconded to theProject Team, have worked in their role and team for many years, and are very experienced in theircurrent applications. They do not understand the roles or needs of other teams and really are notinterested in knowing what the others do or how they do it. They do not understand why they needto use an application that takes into consideration the needs of the other teams. The benefits ofimplementing DAMS are not immediately visible to these internal stakeholders, who believe that thenew systems are imposing more work on them, rather than simplifying the processes. A number ofSubject Matter Experts, who have been seconded to the Project Team, do not have a long-term viewof the needs of their team, but rather have a limited view based on what they currently do. Theapplication requirements have been developed on the basis of information gathered from theseSubject Matter Experts.PROJ6003 Project Execution and ControlAssessment Case Study20213* The contents of this Case Study were adapted from a real case to suit the requirements of the PROJ6003 subject’s assessments and are theproperty of Torrens University Australia.Figure 1 Program Organisational StructureCorporate and Branch teamsThe Staff, who are located at Head Office within their corporate teams, are primarily responsible forliaising and supporting the branch office staff, however they are mainly called upon to report on KPIsand ensure that the projects which are created for each branch office, are delivered according toagreed requirements. For the purposes of simplicity this report will focus on the impacted divisionswithin the Corporate Head Office location, along with their branches which are located inMetropolitan and Non-Metropolitan Regions across the state.The Branch staff are responsible for their assets and their staff as well as their own customers. TheBranches are the delivery arm of the department. While they manage assets and maintenance workat their own sites, they are also responsible for the delivery of the department services to their localcommunities. These Branch staff are also responsible for reporting back to the Corporate Divisions.The aim of DAMS is to reduce the amount of duplication in the preparation of these reports for theCorporate teams, using the data from a centralised base of information, which can be accessed,depending on securities and permission, by all staff who need to access the data.PROJ6003 Project Execution and ControlAssessment Case Study20214* The contents of this Case Study were adapted from a real case to suit the requirements of the PROJ6003 subject’s assessments and are theproperty of Torrens University Australia.The Corporate and Branch teams and their applications within DAMS are listed below in Table 1 Division and Applications.The Regional structure is shown in the map below inFigure 2 Regional Divisions within VictoriaTable 1 Division and Applications
Corporate Division / BranchResponsibility
Application
Release date
Asset Management
Asset Register
Release 1 – deployed
Agreements
Release 1 – deployed
Disposals
Release 1 – deployed
Acquisitions
Release 1 – deployed
People and Culture
People and Lists
Release 1 – deployed
Corporate Finance / All branches
Contractors
Release 1 – deployed
Corporate Finance
Investment Management
Release 3 – no release date
Capital Allocation Tool
Release 3 – no release date
Corporate Reporting
Reporting
Release 1 – deployed
Forecasting and Modelling
Release 3 – no release date
Corporate Planning
Asset Management PlanningModelling
Release 3 – no release date
Corporate Planning / All branches
Condition and efficiencymanagement
Release 3 – no release date
Asset Management ReformImplementation Team / Allbranches
Property Condition Evaluation
Release 2 – delayed
Capability Building Unit/ Allbranches
Asset Maintenance Plan
Release 2 – delayed
Corporate ESM Team / Allbranches
Essential Safety Measures
Release 2 – delayed
Response Programs Unit / Allbranches
Asbestos Registers
Release 2 – delayed
Safe Program
Release 2 – delayed
Asbestos Management andAudits
Moved to Release 3
Cleaning Unit / All branches
Cleaning
Release 2 – delayed, part hasbeen moved to Release 3
PROJ6003 Project Execution and ControlAssessment Case Study20215* The contents of this Case Study were adapted from a real case to suit the requirements of the PROJ6003 subject’s assessments and are theproperty of Torrens University Australia.
Corporate Division / BranchResponsibility
Application
Release date
Contractor Panel application andmanagement
Release 3 – no release date
Cleaning Audits
Release 3 – no release date
All branches
Work Order Management
Release 2 – delayed
Figure 2 Regional Divisions within VictoriaThe productThe key benefits of DAMS are mainly aimed at the Corporate Management Teams, who are looking atthe centralised reporting and centralised future planning options which will be delivered when theproject has been completed. Several applications scheduled for Release 3 are aimed at achieving thefuture planning requirements. At this completion of Release 3, all of the applications will have beendelivered and all staff, state-wide, will have been trained with some havingused the applications forat least 12 months. The Corporate Reporting Team will be developing key reports to provide planningand modelling for future asset acquisitions and asset maintenance programs. These reports will feedfuture budget proposals which will be submitted to the Treasury Department in order to acquirefuture funding. The Forecasting and Modelling application will allow the Corporate Planning Team toutilise the key criteria set for funding of services to the community, on the basis of future planning ofresident numbers in each Region This form of planning looks at a 10 year view into the future and isPROJ6003 Project Execution and ControlAssessment Case Study20216* The contents of this Case Study were adapted from a real case to suit the requirements of the PROJ6003 subject’s assessments and are theproperty of Torrens University Australia.essential for the ongoing funding of services. The Corporate Reporting teams understand the need forthis application, but it also requires the input of data that is maintained by other Corporate Teams, aswell as data that is maintained by the Branch staff.The Branch staff have supplied representatives for a Branch Reference Group, and have workedtogether for a number of years to identify their specific requirements, and to agree the terminologyand the expectations of what they will see and how they will be able to view this data. The BranchReference Group are aware of the need to supply data to all of the Corporate Teams, and continuallyfeel pulled between the teams, as each team requires data from them throughout the year, often atthe end of each quarter.As part of the initial communications with Department Senior and Executive Management,expectations have been set regarding the way in which DAMS will benefit all of the departmentstakeholders, and in particular, how some of the key applications will be used and will be useful. It hasrecently come to light, that these expectations were not conveyed to the Subject Matter Experts or tothe Project Team.Non Department StakeholdersExternal stakeholders include the Training Team, Trainers Are We, who report to the Vendor ProjectManager, Lee, and who have been engaged to supply training materials and provide training to keystakeholders within the Corporate Teams for each application as it is ready to be delivered. TheTraining Team have carried out a Training Needs Analysis very early in the project, and on the basis ofthis Training Needs Analysis, they have provided recommendations regarding the materials andtraining that will be developed. The Training Team are not employed by the Department, and havenot been able to meet with internal or external stakeholders of the Department. Therefore there is alack of understanding of the current as-is processes which are followed within the department andspecific teams and the Training Team are developing the materials based on their understanding ofundocumented to-be processes, taken from the Solutions Specification Document.The application solutions are under development by the vendor following workshops with selectedSubject Matter Experts, who have been appointed by the internal Project Team. The workshops arefacilitated by the Business Analyst, and the Solutions Architect, both of whom note all of their findingsand their solutions into the Solutions Specification Document, This technical document is mappedback to the Tender Requirements Specification Document.Program GovernanceMark meets weekly with the Vendor Project Manager (Lee), the Training Team Project Manager(Emma), the Business Analyst (Martin), the Change Manager (Brett) and the internal Project Manager(Glenn). Mark reports monthly to the Project Steering Committee, which is chaired by the ProjectSponsor.The members of the Department Project Management Team have developed a schedule forrequirement workshops, development of the solution, and development of training materials as wellas training delivery. They have also listed the key milestones, which Mark uses as the basis of his statusreporting to the Steering Committee.The Training Team is able to communicate with the Solutions Development team in order to confirmtheir understanding of the applications and how the business will use these applications. They havePROJ6003 Project Execution and ControlAssessment Case Study20217* The contents of this Case Study were adapted from a real case to suit the requirements of the PROJ6003 subject’s assessments and are theproperty of Torrens University Australia.identified that there has not been a process review of as-is processes, and the to-be processes canonly be found within the Solutions Specification Document. No process maps have been supplied andthey do not appear to have been developed. This has been raised with and requested of theDepartment Project Management Team on many occasions, with no positive outcomes.Figure 3 Program GovernanceSchedule and MilestonesRelease 1 was delivered late. The original release date was end of August 2020. Corporate UserTraining was delivered in August and September with the final go live date of end of September 2020.Release 2 has not been delivered yet. The original release date was March 2021. Training for eachapplication has been delivered during March and April 2021. The go live date was rescheduled to endof July and has since been cancelled. Release of applications to the Branches has been scheduled as aPilot rollout, with the Branch training to be delivered by the Department’s Internal Training Team,headed by Rick. Rick is a Branch Manager who has been seconded to the Project, to deliver training tothe Branches, and he is concerned that this must be successful as it may impact his career progression.As Rick has been learning to use the applications, and preparing the training materials to be used forthe Branches, he has discovered that the applications do not contain the promised features, theterminology on the screens does not match that which was promised to the Branch Reference Group,and features which were to have been automated remain manual data entry. He is concerned as therequirements were gathered in conjunction with his branch colleagues, and he understands theirPROJ6003 Project Execution and ControlAssessment Case Study20218* The contents of this Case Study were adapted from a real case to suit the requirements of the PROJ6003 subject’s assessments and are theproperty of Torrens University Australia.needs and their concerns. Rick is concerned that his colleagues in the Branch Reference Group will notaccept the DAMS system in its current format. He feels let down and embarrassed and is unsure ofhow he will deliver this training to the Pilot Branch Group. Rick needs to begin training soon and is notcomfortable that his training will be well accepted once the Branch Managers realise that they are notgoing to receive the benefits that they have been promised.Release 2 has also suffered a loss of confidence with the Corporate Teams who are completing UserAcceptance Testing. As Release 2 approaches its go live date, User Acceptance Testing is underway.Testing staff have been provided with a walk through by the Vendor Training Team, and this was thefirst time that the Testing staff have seen the applications that they will be testing. They have beenprovided a testing script which they must follow in order to test the solution. These staff are findingthat their expectations of what the DAMS system will do for them, and how it will do it for them, arenot being realised, and the volume of discontent is becoming louder after UAT testing.The Management of the teams receiving the new applications have not previously seen the solution,and they are beginning to express some concerns as they hear their testing staff comment andcomplain about how they are to use the new system. The UAT Team members have found that thepromised features are not in the current release, headings and field names are confusing and containincorrect reference data, and the screens are not user friendly, nor do they contain the data that isrequired. The Management staff therefore asked for a walkthrough of the new applications, and wereprovided with a training session, during which they were taken through the step by step approach tousing the application, and were provided with review scenarios to ensure that they have understoodthe application.During these training sessions, the Management staff began to ask questions of the trainer, about howthe system works and find that it is not delivering what has been promised to them. Questions aboutnew processes and how these apply to their existing processes come to the fore during these trainingsessions. This is repeated in every training session and with different divisions of the department. Thetrainers are beginning to become frustrated as they find new information about expectations, but theyhave already completed the development of materials. The trainers also find that some features whichshould have been working, are now not working, as updates have been implemented.Release 3 is due to be delivered in September 2021 and will be rolled out to the Branch officesbeginning in February 2022. Training and go live dates, however, have not been confirmed. Currently,many features of Release 2 have been deferred to Release 3, in an attempt to deliver Release 2 on orclose to schedule, and there is ongoing discussion between the Vendor and the Project Team,regarding the changes and increases in scope. Lee and Mark have had a number of strong discussionsregarding requirements and the agreed specifications. Lee has escalated many of these issues to herSenior Management from a contract perspective.Mark has left the project, suddenly and with no warning, in mid-May 2021 along with his assistantTeena.Table 2 Scheduled Applications and Release dates
Application
Release Number
Notes
Asset Register
Release 1
Deployed
Agreements
Release 1
Deployed
Disposals
Release 1
Deployed
PROJ6003 Project Execution and ControlAssessment Case Study20219* The contents of this Case Study were adapted from a real case to suit the requirements of the PROJ6003 subject’s assessments and are theproperty of Torrens University Australia.
Application
Release Number
Notes
Acquisitions
Release 1
Deployed
Contractors
Release 1
Deployed
People and Lists
Release 1
Deployed
Reporting
Release 1
Deployed
Property Condition Evaluation
Release 2
Delayed past July
Work Management
Release 2
Delayed past July
Asset Maintenance Plan
Release 2
Delayed past July
Essential Safety Measures
Release 2
Delayed past July
Asbestos Registers
Release 2
Partially moved to Release 3
Safe Program
Release 2
Delayed past July
Cleaning
Release 2
Partially moved to Release 3
Asbestos Management and Audits
Release 3
Delivery date not scheduled
Capital Allocation Tool
Release 3
Delivery date not scheduled
Investment Management
Release 3
Delivery date not scheduled
Forecasting and Modelling
Release 3
Delivery date not scheduled
Asset Management Planning Modelling
Release 3
Delivery date not scheduled
Condition and efficiency management
Release 3
Delivery date not scheduled
Contractor Panel application andmanagement
Release 3
Delivery date not scheduled
Cleaning Audits
Release 3
Delivery date not scheduled
A new Program Manager, Jenny, has just been appointed to replace Mark. She is hearing rumblings ofdiscontent and has a number of meetings scheduled with Project Team Managers, the Corporate TeamManagers and the Branch Training Team Lead, Rick, who is liaising with the Branch Managers. Release2 is on hold, and the training for the Pilot Branches has just been cancelled. Jenny reviews the currentProject Reporting dashboard (Appendix 2) before meeting the team.PROJ6003 Project Execution and ControlAssessment Case Study202110* The contents of this Case Study were adapted from a real case to suit the requirements of the PROJ6003 subject’s assessments and are theproperty of Torrens University Australia.Appendix 1 Rate CardPROJ6003 Project Execution and ControlAssessment Case Study202111* The contents of this Case Study were adapted from a real case to suit the requirements of the PROJ6003 subject’s assessments and are theproperty of Torrens University Australia.Appendix 2 Department Dashboard Reporting* How to cite this: Torrens University Australia (2021). Department Asset Management System –DAMS Project. PROJ6003 Project Execution and Control – Assessment Case Study.

READ ALSO...   Issues in Early Childhood Education
Order from Academic Writers Bay
Best Custom Essay Writing Services

QUALITY: 100% ORIGINAL PAPERNO PLAGIARISM – CUSTOM PAPER