Top Banner
Running head: ULTRAMAX 1 UltraMAX Testing Project Keller Graduate School of Management Advanced Project Management
28

Case study 1

Oct 31, 2014

Download

Education

cman84

UltraMaxx Outline
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Case study 1

Running head: ULTRAMAX 1

UltraMAX Testing Project

Keller Graduate School of Management

Advanced Project Management

Page 2: Case study 1

ULTRAMAX 2

UltraMAX Testing Project

Introduction

NutroBalance has begun the implementation of a new performance and weight loss pill for

women. The Board of Directors for NutroBalance is set to introduce UltraMAX for women, after

adequate testing and proven results are seen and tested upon. The project started and

immediately was delayed by incomplete tasks. The Board of Directors has given the Project

Manager an opportunity to provide solutions for, and remediate the issue given the pressing

deadlines for the product’s release. The Project Manager has proposed two strategies with

striking differences and associated risks to the Board. Both plans have associated cost

fluctuations; however, the risks of tardy completion can be curtailed in both scenarios.

Section 1

Alex has requested a response in regards to the UltraMAX product testing from the

appointed Project Manager. The following response was delivered via email:

The UltraMAX testing and implementation project requires the use of 4 resources;

however, as indicated in the attached Critical Task Report, Robert has been over allocated

between tasks 5 and 6. Overall, the project at completion should take 138 days given the

unaltered critical path analysis. The project is anticipated to start February 22, 2010 and the

scheduled completion date is set for September 1, 2010. The tasks displayed in the critical

analysis figure 1.1, which are significant to completing the project on schedule, are tasks:

1,2,3,4,5,9,11,12, and 13. With the large amount of critical tasks for this project, strict and

cautious planning should be utilized in anticipation of completing the project on time.

Page 3: Case study 1

ULTRAMAX 3

Figure 1.1 Critical Task Assessments

Page 4: Case study 1

ULTRAMAX 4

Section 2

NutroBalance, a weight loss supplement and nutritional snack food company has long

provided athletes and health conscious people numerous products to enhance their goals of

weight loss and physical fitness. A recent investment in a pill-form supplement for weight lifting

and cardiovascular exercising women called UltraMAX has stirred a request from the Board of

Directors for testing and application before forwarding the product to customers. The weight-loss

drug study has a project manager and 4 team members assigned to the tasks of getting the

product market ready. The Board of Directors has given the project manager 140 days to

complete the testing phase inclusive of 13 tasks. The project will begin on February 22, 2010.

Page 5: Case study 1

ULTRAMAX 5

The project manager has analyzed the entire project with Microsoft Project. Currently,

the 13 tasks are scheduled to complete 2 days ahead of schedule on September 1, 2010 with an

initial cost of $41880.00. There is a resource constraint that should be addressed in regards to

tasks 5 and 6 and Robert, the coordinator for those events. Leveling the schedule for Robert to

adequately complete his tasks adjusts the scheduled completion date forward by two days, and

remains intact with the 140 day deadline on September 3, 2010. Since task 6 was not part of the

critical path (essential tasks to complete on time), the assignment dates were moved to April 29

and 30, 2010 with no conflict to the critical tasks.

The UltraMAX project team must follow the schedule continuously, as any time

alterations will alter the completion of the project as well as expected costs. The team holds the

extraneous risks of extended task periods, product failure or that the product may be need to be

altered before results in test subjects present themselves- which may further the time period

needed for the study. Figure 2.1 shows the over-allocation of Robert before resolving leveling

the project. Figure 2.2 and 2.3 display resource usage before leveling the resources and after.

Page 6: Case study 1

ULTRAMAX 6

Figure 2.1 Before Leveling:

Page 7: Case study 1

ULTRAMAX 7

Figure 2.2 Before Leveling:

Page 8: Case study 1

ULTRAMAX 8

Page 9: Case study 1

ULTRAMAX 9

Page 10: Case study 1

ULTRAMAX 10

Figure 2.3 After Leveling:

Page 11: Case study 1

ULTRAMAX 11

Page 12: Case study 1

ULTRAMAX 12

Page 13: Case study 1

ULTRAMAX 13

Section 3: Executive Summary

The UltraMAX testing project commenced on February 22, 2010 with a 5 member

project team inclusive of the project manager. Aligning with the required 140 day limitation set

by the Board of Directors, the scheduling and resources were matched and configured

appropriately. Maintaining some risk of task completion requirements, the project manager made

clear to the Board that an extension of time and/or increased expected costs may be needed in

order to align with NutroBalance’s expectations for the product in the marketplace.

As of April, 21 2010, the project has changed the course of the schedule and has pushed

the date of completion (given all other elements remain time efficient) to September 17, 2010.

The project schedule reveals that the time constraint for testing became apparent after task 3

(Screening the Test Subjects) took 10 days longer to complete than expected. Unfortunately, task

3 is a critical task, thus pushing the remainder of the project back 10 days.

There are currently 10 remaining tasks to complete. Decisive maneuvering must take

place to ensure the 140 day deadline if the Board of Directors is unwilling to add time to the

testing of UltraMAX. Resolving the time constraint and ensuring adequate completion efficiency

of future tasks may add costs as well.

There are ways to resolve this issue with minimum alteration of cost and schedule. As

mentioned, if the Board decides to stay with the 140 day limitation, then costs will increase.

Increasing the maximum capacities of the project team, and modifying the work task

assignments may prove to be efficient ways to get the project back on track, and possibly finish

earlier. Two different plans of remediation will be displayed and explained for the consideration

of the Board of Directors. If no course of action takes place, than the expected project

completion date will tentatively be set back to September 17, 2010.

Page 14: Case study 1

ULTRAMAX 14

Plan A

Plan A requires the cooperation and focus of the project team as they will be asked to be

more productive than average on a daily basis and work overtime hours as needed. By increasing

the capacities of the individual team members to a maximum of 140 percent, the 140 day

completion can be attained. By increasing the percentage of work done per day, the team

members will finish tasks in less amounts of time. In other words, they will have to pick up the

slack and work harder to make up lost time. This plan entails the most risk because the results

cannot be guaranteed to be successful, and the additional need of funding. By strategically

placing time decreases in the identified tasks, cost increases from overtime hours are minimized;

however, the approval of cost estimations from the Board as well as the approval and willingness

of the team for overtime hours will be needed.

This alternative plan entails the following features as shown in the attached Figures 3.1-2:

56 hour work variance

$3360.00 cost variance

Task 7 increase of max units to 133%, shortening the task by 3 days

Task 9 increase of max units to 108%, shortening the task by 5 days

Task 11 increase of max units to 140%, shortening the task by 2 days

Task 13 increase of max units to 125%, shortening the task by 2 days

Page 15: Case study 1

ULTRAMAX 15

Figure 3.1 Overview Report

Page 16: Case study 1

ULTRAMAX 16

Figure 3.2 Unstarted Task Report:

 

Page 17: Case study 1

ULTRAMAX 17

Page 18: Case study 1

ULTRAMAX 18

Plan B

Utilizing resources to their max potential will aid in getting the UltraMAX testing

completed within time limitations. Another method to get the project schedule back in line is to

pair up resources to complete tasks sooner. If additional task assignments to team members are

strategically placed and the Board approves the slight cost increase, the entire project could be

completed earlier than expected. An anticipated two day buffer and an early deliverable can be

created with this sequence of changes. Since other projects have utilized partners in completing

tasks, and the project is currently running behind schedule, team members are willing to work

together to complete the project on time. This alternative is highly recommended by the Project

Manager over the previously mentioned Plan A due to its cost effectiveness, and schedule

modifications. The following figures 3.3-5 display the features of Plan B.

Features of Plan B include:

Task 11 decrease to 3.5 days, addition of Tony to the task team, increased cost of $60.00

Task 12 decrease to 4 days, addition of Robert to the task team, increased cost of $320.00

Task 13 decrease to 5 days, addition of Robert to the task team, increased cost of $400.00

Total project cost increase of only $780.00

Project completion date of 9/1/2010, two day decrease to a 138 day total project time

Two days to buffer any incomplete tasks

All team members can fulfill the capacities of the additional tasks assigned

Page 19: Case study 1

ULTRAMAX 19

Figure 3.3 Plan B Overview

Page 20: Case study 1

ULTRAMAX 20

Figure 3.4 Task Assignments

Page 21: Case study 1

ULTRAMAX 21

Figure 3.5 Unstarted Task Report

 

Page 22: Case study 1

ULTRAMAX 22

Page 23: Case study 1

ULTRAMAX 23