Posted: March 12th, 2023

WEEK 8 DISCUSSION QUESTION

Week 8 Assignment – Activity: Keeping the Project on Course

Overview

It is now important to consider how to manage project obstacles and risks. Being able to continue the progression of a project is important in the face of unpredictable conditions in the internal and external environment of an organization. Use the following resource to complete this activity:

• Project Management Case Studies.

  Read the case study, “The Trophy Case,” pages 243–245.

Instructions

In 1-2 pages:

1. Discuss or critique whether the project was planned correctly.
2. Discuss whether management was committed to the project. 
3. Discuss whether or not fostering more cooperation was within the scope of the project.

   Is it possible or even desirable, when doing strategic planning for project management, to include ways to improve cooperation and working relationships? Or is this beyond the scope of strategic planning for project management?

4. Examine actions that could have been taken to get the project back on track.

243

The Trophy Project

The ill-fated Trophy Project was in trouble right from the start. Reichart, who
had been an assistant project manager, was involved with the project from its
conception. When the Trophy Project was accepted by the company, Reichart was
assigned as the project manager. The program schedules started to slip from day
1, and expenditures were excessive. Reichart found that the functional manag-
ers were charging direct labor time to his project but working on their own pet
projects. When he complained of this, he was told not to meddle in the functional
manager’s allocation of resources and budgeted expenditures. After approxi-
mately six months, Reichart was requested to make a progress report directly to
corporate and division staffs.

Reichart took this opportunity to bare his soul. The report substantiated that
the project was forecasted to be one complete year behind schedule. Reichart’s
staff, as supplied by the line managers, was inadequate to maintain the current
pace, let alone make up any time that had already been lost. The estimated cost
at completion at this interval showed a cost overrun of at least 20 percent. This
was Reichart’s first opportunity to tell his story to people who were in a position
to correct the situation. The result of Reichart’s frank, candid evaluation of the
Trophy Project was very predictable. Nonbelievers finally saw the light, and line
managers realized that they had a role to play in the completion of the project.
Most of the problems were now out in the open and could be corrected with ade-
quate staffing and resources. Corporate staff ordered immediate remedial action
and staff support to provide Reichart a chance to bail out his program.

C
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

2
0
1
7
.

W
i
l
e
y
.

A
l
l

r
i
g
h
t
s

r
e
s
e
r
v
e
d
.

M
a
y

n
o
t

b
e

r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
e
d

i
n

a
n
y

f
o
r
m

w
i
t
h
o
u
t

p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

t
h
e

p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
,

e
x
c
e
p
t

f
a
i
r

u
s
e
s

p
e
r
m
i
t
t
e
d

u
n
d
e
r

U
.
S
.

o
r

a
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e

c
o
p
y
r
i
g
h
t

l
a
w
.

EBSCO Publishing : eBook Collection (EBSCOhost) – printed on 2/26/2023 5:07 PM via STRAYER UNIVERSITY
AN: 1502146 ; Harold Kerzner.; Project Management Case Studies
Account: strayer.main.eds-live

244 PROJECT MANAGEMENT CAsE sTUDIEs

The results were not at all what Reichart had expected. He no longer reported
to the project office; he now reported directly to the operations manager. Corpo-
rate staff’s interest in the project became very intense, requiring a 7:00 a.m. meet-
ing every Monday for complete review of the project status and plans for recovery.
Reichart found himself spending more time preparing paperwork, reports, and
projections for his Monday morning meetings than he did administering the
Trophy Project. The main concern of corporate was to get the project back on
schedule. Reichart spent many hours preparing the recovery plan and establishing
manpower requirements to bring the program back onto the original schedule.

Group staff, in order to closely track the progress of the Trophy Project,
assigned an assistant program manager. The assistant program manager deter-
mined that a sure cure for the Trophy Project would be to computerize the various
problems and track the progress through a very complex computer program. Cor-
porate provided Reichart with 12 additional staff members to work on the com-
puter program. In the meantime, nothing changed. The functional managers still
did not provide adequate staff for recovery, as they assumed that the additional
manpower Reichart had received from corporate would accomplish that task.

After approximately $50,000 was spent on the computer program to track the
problems, it was found that the computer could not handle the program objectives.
Reichart discussed this problem with a computer supplier and found that $15,000
more was required for programming and additional storage capacity. It would take
two months for installation of the additional storage capacity and completion of
the programming. At this point, the decision was made to abandon the computer
program.

Reichart was now a year and a half into the program with no prototype units
completed. The program was still nine months behind schedule with the overrun
projected at 40 percent of budget. The customer had been receiving reports on a
timely basis and was well aware that the Trophy Project was behind schedule.
Reichart had spent a great deal of time with the customer explaining the problems
and the plan for recovery. Another problem that Reichart had to contend with was
that the vendors who were supplying components for the project were also run-
ning behind schedule.

One sunday morning, while Reichart was in his office putting together a
report for the client, a corporate vice president came in. “Reichart,” he said, “in
any project I look at the top sheet of paper, and the man whose name appears at the
top of the sheet is the one I hold responsible. For this project, your name appears
at the top of the sheet. If you cannot bail this thing out, you are in serious trouble
in this corporation.” Reichart did not know which way to turn or what to say. He
had no control over the functional managers who were creating the problems, but
he was the person who was being held responsible.

After another three months, the customer, becoming impatient, realized that
the Trophy Project was in serious trouble and requested that the division general

EBSCOhost – printed on 2/26/2023 5:07 PM via STRAYER UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

The Trophy Project 245

manager and his entire staff visit the customer’s plant to give a progress and get-
well report within a week. The division general manager called Reichart into his
office and said, “Reichart, go visit our customer. Take three or four functional
line people with you and try to placate him with whatever you feel is necessary.”
Reichart and four functional line people visited the customer and gave a four-and-
a-half-hour presentation defining the problems and the progress to that point. The
customer was very polite and even commented that it was an excellent presenta-
tion, but the content was totally unacceptable. The program was still six to eight
months late, and the customer demanded progress reports on a weekly basis. The
customer made arrangements to assign a representative in Reichart’s department
to be on-site at the project on a daily basis and to interface with Reichart and his
staff as required. After this turn of events, the program became very hectic.

The customer representative demanded constant updates and problem iden-
tification and then became involved in attempting to solve these problems. This
involvement created many changes in the program and the product in order to
eliminate some of the problems. Reichart had trouble with the customer and did
not agree with the changes in the program. He expressed his disagreement vocally
when, in many cases, the customer felt the changes were at no cost. This caused a
deterioration of the relationship between client and producer.

One morning Reichart was called into the division general manager’s office
and introduced to Mr. “Red” Baron. Reichart was told to turn over the reins of the
Trophy Project to Red immediately. “Reichart, you will be temporarily reassigned
to some other division within the corporation. I suggest you start looking outside
the company for another job.” Reichart looked at Red and asked, “Who did this?
Who shot me down?”

Red was program manager on the Trophy Project for approximately six
months, after which, by mutual agreement, he was replaced by a third project
manager. The customer reassigned his local program manager to another project.
With the new team, the Trophy Project was finally completed one year behind
schedule and at a 40 percent cost overrun.

QUESTIONS

1. Did the project appear to be planned correctly?
2. Did functional management seem to be committed to the project?
3. Did senior management appear supportive and committed?
4. Can a single methodology for project management be designed to force coopera-

tion to occur between groups?
5. Is it possible or even desirable for strategic planning for project management to

include ways to improve cooperation and working relationships, or is this beyond
the scope of strategic planning for project management?

EBSCOhost – printed on 2/26/2023 5:07 PM via STRAYER UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use

EBSCOhost – printed on 2/26/2023 5:07 PM via STRAYER UNIVERSITY. All use subject to https://www.ebsco.com/terms-of-use