Question

Construction of the new Information Central building at South Land University (SLU) is completed on time and on budget. Administrators at SLU and managers at Finley Construction Company, the building’s prime contractor, are very pleased with the results. Besides meeting schedule and cost targets, the building and its equipment, including a variety of computer and technical gadgetry intended to augment learning, appear to have met all of the technical requirements. Much of the technology is leading edge, and some of it is being applied for the first time ever in a learning/teaching environment by SLU. By all accounts the project is a success. After reviewing and confirming that all of Finley’s obligations for the project have been met, Jack Krackower, the project manager, meets with Sharon Holden, SLU’s vice president of finance, and Ramat Ghan, SLU’s vice president of facilities, to finalize details of project termination and payment. The meeting goes well and ends with discussion of future projects at SLU and possible involvement of Finley. After the meeting Jack returns to his office, whereupon the director of Finley’s PMO asks him if he planned to do a post-completion project review. “Nope,” quipped Jack, “no need to. The project was a success and everything went just as planned.”A few months later, Sharon and Ramat give a final presentation on the project to SLU’s president, reporting that it met all the technical and building requirements, the schedule, and the budget. In fact, they say, given the positive outcome of the project, some of the new technology in the building should be installed in other campus buildings and Finley hired to oversee it. “Not so fast,” says the president. “I’ve heard reports that students and faculty find the new technology confusing, difficult to use, and maybe irrelevant. In fact, some rooms in the building are vacant for lack of use. Other rooms are crowded, but students go there to socialize or relax, not to take advantage of any sophisticated learning technologies. I don’t know what the problem is—if it’s with the technology or with way the Finley handled it.”

1. Comment on Jack’s neglect to conduct a post-completion project review. Is a review unnecessary whenever a project is considered a success?

2. Is the project really a success? What kind of follow-up steps should Finley and SLU have taken after the project was completed?

Answer 1

Answer:-

1)

A project cannot be named successful simply because it has been completed inside given time and inside assigned spending plan. The goal for which project is initiated should be actually met. Consequently success of a project can be resolved after taking into account its completion time, spending utilization and successful post project review.

Hence however project may be considered a success, post completion project review is required to affirm/qualify the success. Jack considered completion of all obligations as project success and neglected post project completion. Consequently he took wrong action.

2)

According to the project manager and administrator of SLU, the project is successful however SLU president has given a negative feedback after the presentation by Sharon and Ramat.

The SLU president decision was that understudies have complained about several issues that rooms are not appropriately outfitted with present day machines; the elements of machines are of no utilization to their work, advancements are irrelevant to their standards and a few rooms are unfilled, it has not been furnished with current advances and understudies were seen getting a charge out of among social gatherings.

Findley and SLU mutually ought to have checked individually that each and every work done is according to their rules or not. Understudies meet ought to have been organized to clarify the individual technical necessities according to their industry standards and ought to have asked the SLU president about any other changes that are required to revamp the structure.

These factors will lead to recognizing the areas which are not done and that may require further changes then it ought to be centered more around finalizing of the project. The quality and work standard of Findley ought to have been checked according to SLU rules to avoid any future issues on their side.

Please please like the answer...........