Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Seismic Zone Residential Construction Improvement Program project development is based on the
lectures given in the books ‘PMP® in depth: project management professional study guide for the PMP®
exam’ (Sanghera, 2010) and ‘Effective Project Management: Traditional, Agile, Extreme’ (Wysocki,
2009). Individual project assignment, resources, costs and schedule for working out this project are
given in material handed over by University of Liverpool/Laureate Online Education (UoL, 2011).
Flexible Models
Industrial Model Developers and Builders
Research and Development Unit
Property Development Department of the Government (PDDG)
Someplace
Somewhere
Project: The Seismic Zone Residential Construction Improvement Program
SEISMIC ZONE RESIDENTAL CONSTRUCTION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM PROJECT SCOPE STATEMENT
Scope is defined as description of the project boundaries and is defining what project will deliver, what
is needed and organizations affected.
Flexible Models (FM) will design, produce and assemble specified ‘PDDG Box Mk3’ on the site
designated by Property Development Department of the Government (PDDG) in order that PDDG can
start their work on effectiveness assessment of the boxes. Planned project duration is 51 day with cost
of $121,794.00 and project plan is shown in the Gantt chart as part of this scope. Given plan, in
Appendix A is created with assumption that there will be no delays in transport, specifications given
are final and that PDDG will prepare site for assessment in time to receive shipment and that
implementation may begin. As per Stoller (2010) The Gantt chart will help project manager and
stakeholders in communication by visualizing timelines and their interrelation as well as dependencies.
Project will be created in Microsoft Project instead of previously planned OpenProj, which change
should not bring any alternations to the plan itself but will enhance control and communication as MS
Project offers availability of connection to our Web‐based project tracking system which is offering
information on the project at any moment in time.
Quality of the delivered boxes is depending entirely on quality of the material specified by PDDG while
FM is guaranteeing best possible design and production from their end. The quality of the project itself
will be controlled trough the Quality Management Plan, which consists of the details on quality
assurance, quality control and continuous improvement.
Resources for production are available in all departments except in 'Cutting and parts development'
department which is scheduled for work on the earlier contracted projects, however, they may be
available for this project exclusively if we reschedule them from other projects which action may result
in increase of cutting costs as we will have to hire sub‐contractors for other ongoing projects or utilize
them when they are free from their assignments elsewhere which may cause schedule extension for 6
days for each day delayed in this particular task. Cost of exclusive availability is shown in the cost
estimation.
Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) is created and shown in Appendix B and based on it Requirement
Breakdown Structure (RBS) and Staffing (Resources) Management Plan are created in the next chapter
of this paper.
Portny (2010) stating that WBS is laying foundation of the project’s success by putting down on the
paper all work required to be done in order to accomplish stated objectives, further, WBS must be
comprehensive and friendly to understand to others by organizing it in accordance with immediate and
final deliverables.
In his article on significance of WBS, Zhao (2006) wrote following: ‘The level of detail shall be driven by
a well established work breakdown structure (WBS), which shall be inherently built into a contingency
risk model. When the contingency amount is derived, it will be automatically dispersed into
appropriate accounts based on the risk levels and cost weighing factors. He is also writing that ‘using
the WBS to help break down the estimate has far reaching effects for both cost management and
contingency depletion, because:
‐ Future changes can be attributable to the associated WBS accounts;
‐ Human errors can be traceable back to appropriate WBS home domains;
‐ Responsible individuals can be accountable for respective WBS contingency;
‐ Potential savings can be recognizable in corresponding risk free WBS’.
Scope of work is remaining the same as described in the Project Proposal.
Schedule (Wysocki, 2009, pp.242‐244) is presented in the Gantt chart – Appendix A, with possible
prolongation of 12 days if PDDG decline option for the cost compensation in order to secure 'Cutting
and parts development' department specialists availability.
Deliverable of this project is boxes production, delivery and their implementation on the site
designated by PDDG.
FM is not bearing any responsibility for the quality of material specified by PDDG, further there is no
fault or any responsibility of FM if delivery or implementation is delayed due to natural causes
(weather conditions) or PDDG failure to prepare implementation site timely.
Product, boxes of a particular dimension used in the foundation of buildings is designated as ‘PDDG
Box Mk3’ and specification for it is set by Research and Development Unit (RDU) of PDDG. Product will
be accepted if quality control confirms conformity with specifications after assembly integration is
completed.
Project stakeholders:
Name Position Department Company
Kunal Chopra Project Manager Project FM
Roy Benjamin General Manager Designing and Drafting FM
Michael Gartner General Manager Cutting FM
Philip Cloony General Manager Assembly FM
Jim Stanford General Manager Supply Chain FM
Management
John Morris Vice President New Model FM
Caroline Smith Marketing Chief Marketing FM
Paul Lee Technical Lead RDU PDDG
Program Manager Seismic Zone PDDG
Joseph Bukhmann Chief Editor Construction
Consortium Journal
STAFFING (RESOURCES) MANAGEMENT PLAN
Resources requirement is estimated by use of Estimate Activity Resources process, which purpose is to
give us estimation on resource types needed and estimation on quantity of each type of needed
resource (Sanghera, 2010).
In order to create Resources Management Plan following Requirement Breakdown Structure (RBS) is
developed in the table shown bellow (Wysocki, 2009, pp.63‐65):
Activity Task Department Person in Charge
1 ‐ Requirements 1.1 Interview client Design & Drafting Roy Benjamin
analysis stakeholders
1.2 Product detail analysis Design & Drafting Roy Benjamin
Assembly Philip Cloony
1.3 Refinement of the final Design & Drafting Roy Benjamin
draft
2 ‐ Design and 2.1 High level design Design & Drafting Roy Benjamin
concept
2.2 Details with operation Design & Drafting Roy Benjamin
design
3 ‐ Purchasing 3.1 Cardboard sheet Supply Chain Caroline Smith
Material purchasing Management
3.2 Metal sheet purchasing Supply Chain Caroline Smith
Management
3.3 Cubes Purchasing Supply Chain Caroline Smith
Management
4 ‐ Production 4.1 Set up Assembly Philip Cloony
4.2 Cutting and parts Cutting Michael Gartner
development
4.3 Sub‐Assembly 1 Assembly Philip Cloony
4.4 Sub‐Assembly 2 Assembly Philip Cloony
4.5 Sub Assembly 3 Assembly Philip Cloony
4.6 Assembly integration Assembly Philip Cloony
5 ‐ Delivery 5.1 Pre‐delivery Supply Chain Caroline Smith
Management
5.2 Shipment/Delivery Supply Chain Caroline Smith
Management
5.3 Implementation Design & Drafting Roy Benjamin
Assembly Philip Cloony
Staffing (resources) management plan is shown in Appendix C and project network schedule in
Appendix D.
COST ESTIMATION
Hamilton (2006) is stating that ‘cost management is the process of estimating, control, and data
analysis to establish a continuous cycle of information for the efficient implementation of projects’.
In his article Good (2009) is stating that defined project scope is base of cost estimation. He is writing
following: ‘The development team and cost estimator must provide their best estimate of actual
required quantities. Quantities will developed using a variety of sources, including the cost estimators
knowledge and experience, comparable industry projects, company databases, functional experts, and
historical factors. Pricing is typically sourced from procurement groups, recent comparable past
projects, and vendors/contractors’.
Good (2009) further establishing that cost estimate always must have back‐up which is showing origin
of the numbers and what assumptions were made and that is very important that there is no hidden
contingencies in cost estimation, simply because, he says, hidden contingencies regardless whether
they coming from inflating prices or quantities, degrading quality of cost estimation, eroding
management confidence in cost estimation and may ultimately show the picture of uneconomic
project.
Cost calculation for Seismic Zone Residential Construction Improvement Program is made based on
methodology given in Sanghera’s book (2010, pp.357‐361) and final project description handed by
University of Liverpool (UoL, 2011).
Task ID Cost Description Duration Total Cost $
1.1 work 4 4,800.00
1.2 work 6 14,400.00
1.3 work 2 1,200.00
2.1 work 4 2,400.00
2.2 work 6 10,800.00
3.1 material 1,000.00
3.2 material 1,250.00
3.3 material 9,000.00
4.1 work 4 3,600.00
4.2 work 3 2,430.00
4.3 work 6 10,800.00
4.4 work 6 10,800.00
4.5 work 4 4,800.00
4.6 work 3 2,700.00
5.1 Fixed cost 2 3,000.00
5.2 Fixed cost 14 6,000.00
5.3 work 7 18,900.00
Grand Total $: 107,880.00
Initial calculation showing estimated total cost at $107,880, however, final cost will be determined
after Risk Management Plan analysis is performed.
According to Ciraci and Polat (2009) accurate cost estimate made in planning stage is having potential
of averting many problems.
RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN
Bragdon (2007) is stating that ‘risk identification is iterative; it must be properly executed on a
continuing basis in order for the overall risk management effort to add any value. Nevertheless, there
is no surefire formula for success. Successful risk identification requires discipline and creativity,
urgency and patience, technical knowledge and intuition’.
‘Risk is the uncertainty of occurrence of a phenomenon which, if happens, has a positive or negative
effect on project objectives. Risk indicates the impact of a future event on current projects and
measures the degree of deviation from the objectives of the project proposed standards. Any activity
requires knowledge and risk taking. For successful activity is necessary to identify all possible risks,
their quantification, and taking entire period of their progress’ (Melnic, 2010).
For this project risk identification was conducted in the initial project risk assessment meeting. Risks
have been identified and as schedule is quite stringent those risks are included in the Risk Register. It is
still remaining to conduct Risk Assessment Meeting of senior project team members and stakeholders
and eventual additional risks identified should be also entered in the Risk Register.
Risks in this project will be managed and controlled within the management, interproject, technical
and time constraints. All of identified risks must be evaluated in order to determine how they affect
those constraints. The project manager, with the project team assistance, will determine the best way
of response for each risk in order to ensure compliance with those constraints.
Risk management plan for Seismic Zone Residential Construction Improvement Program
Risk Constraint Risk Identification Risk Mitigation Person in Charge
ID type
1 Management Two leading cutters from Rescheduling their tasks in Michael Gartner
Cutting Department may order to ensure that they are
Interproject not be available for available on required days
scheduled dates
2 Management Rescheduling and Updated list on personnel Roy Benjamin
transfer of designers and deployment must be kept and Philip Cloony
assemblers from task to reviewed daily in order to
task make timely transfer
3 Management Possible schedule creep Management team must Department
monitor the project at all Heads
times and keep up to date
with activities. Kunal Chopra
Page 1
APPENDIX A - PROJECT SCHEDULE
Jun 26, '11 Jul 3, '11 Jul 10, '11 Jul 17, '11 Jul 24, '11 Jul 31, '11
S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T
Design Department
Design Department,Assembly Department
Design Department
Design Department
Design Department
Assembly Department
Supply Chain
Supply Chain
Supply Chain
Cutting Department
Assem
Assem
Assembly Department
Pre-Delivery
Page 2
APPENDIX A - PROJECT SCHEDULE
Aug 7, '11 Aug 14, '11 Aug 21, '11 Aug 28, '11 Sep 4, '11 Sep 11, '11
F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W T F S S M T W
bly Department
bly Department
Assembly Department
Shipment/Delivery
Design Department,Assembly Departm
Page 3
APPENDIX B – WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE
Project
Completion
1.0 Requirement 2.0 Design and 3.0 Purchasing 4.0 Production 5.0 Delivery
Analysis Concept Material
4.64.6
Assembly
Assembly 5.1 5.2
1.1
1.2interview
Interview 1.2 Product detail
Product detail Pre‐delivery Delivery
Integration
integration Pre-Delivery Shipment
client stake
client stakehol analysis
analysis
holders
2.2High level
High level 2.1 Details with 4.2 Cutting & 4.3 Sub- 4.4 Sub- 4.5 Sub-
Details with Cutting and Sub‐Assembly Sub‐Assembly Sub‐Assembly
Design
design operational
operation design Parts
Parts developm. Assembly
1 1 Assembly
2 2 Assembly
3 3
Design Development
4.1 Set up
APPENDIX C – STAFFING (RESOURCES) MANAGEMENT PLAN
Activity Task ID Requirement Period Days Total Rqre Transfer to Transfer Remark Total
ID per Task Task ID from Task Required
ID Availability
for Activity
1 1.1 Designer 27.06‐30.06 4 8 1.2 After completion of
task 1.1 transfer to 1.2
1.2 Designer 27.06‐30.06 4 10 Required 10 designers
for first 4 days of 1.2
1.2 Designer 03.07‐04.07 2 10 1.3 1.1 8 designers transferred
on completion of 1.1
1.2 Assembler 27.06.‐04.07 6 6 6
1.3 Designer 06.07‐07.07 2 4 1.2 After completion of 18
task 1.2, 4 designers
transferred to task 1.3
2 2.1 Designer 08.07‐13.07 4 4 2.2 After completion of
task 2.1 transfer to 2.2
2.2 Designer 12.07‐13.07 2 12 Required 12 designers
for first 2 days of 2.2
2.2 Designer 14.07‐19.07 4 8 2.2 After completion of 16
task 2.1, 4 designers
transferred to task 2.2
4 4.1 Assembler 20.07‐25.07 4 6 4.3 & 4.4 After completion of
task 4.1, 3 assemblers
transfer to task 4.3 and
other 3 to task 4.4
4.2 Cutter 20.07‐22.07 3 9 9
4.3 Assembler 26.07‐29.07 4 12 4.1
4.3 Assembler 01.08‐02.08 2 8 4.5 After completion of
task 4.5, 4 assemblers
transferred to task 4.3
4.4 Assembler 26.07‐29.07 4 12 4.1
4.4 Assembler 01.08‐02.08 2 8 4.5 After completion of
task 4.5, 4 assemblers
transferred to task 4.4
4.5 Assembler 26.07‐29.07 4 8 4.3 & 4.4 After completing task
4.5, 4 assemblers
transferred to task 4.3
and other 4 to task 4.4
4.6 Assembler 03.08‐05‐08 3 6 4.3 or 4.4 Upon completion of 32
tasks 4.3 and 4.4, 6
assemblers transferred
to task 4.6
5 5.3 Designer 26.08‐05.09 7 11 11
Assembler 26.08‐05.09 7 7 7
APPENDIX D – PROJECT NETWORK DIAGRAM
4 4 3 3
1.1 2.2 3 4.2
2
1.3
6 6 4 6
4.4
4.5
3 2
4.6 5.1
14
5.2
5.3
APPENDIX E – COMMUNICATION PLAN