Rapid Prototyping Project Management Issues

This assignment examines a real-world case study about Frank Billings, an engineer tasked with developing four rapid prototyping machines. The analysis focuses on several project management issues that arose, including the absence of defined project management methodologies, scope verification, stakeholder identification, communication matrix, and change control procedure. These shortcomings led to conflicts and challenges during the project execution.

Network
Project
Management
August 25
2017
Name of University:
Student’s Name
Rapid Prototyping

Network Project Management
Table of Content
Introduction......................................................................................................................................2
Project Management: Issues and their Causes.................................................................................2
Project Management Methodologies were not used....................................................................2
Scope of work was not verified between the start and end of work............................................2
Stakeholder Identification not performed....................................................................................2
No communication matrix developed..........................................................................................3
Change Control Procedure is missing..........................................................................................3
Recommendations............................................................................................................................3
Conclusion.......................................................................................................................................4
References........................................................................................................................................4
1

Network Project Management
Introduction
Since 1990 when it was first started, is growing like anything. The reason why it is becoming so popular
is this technology has provided a brilliant facility to the companies to produce highly complex designed
equipment much faster and better quality1. It helps in reducing the scrap work and a better platform to
communicate their ideas.
Frank Billings was an engineering graduate who was very much enthusiastic to study in detail regarding
the rapid prototyping. His dream became true after three years of completing his graduation, after he left
Cocable, received order from his ex-company to develop four rapid prototyping machines according to
the specifications provided by Cocable.
Project Management: Issues and their Causes
Project Management Methodologies were not used
In the contract awarded by the Cocable to Frank, nothing was mentioned related to the
submission of project management documents anywhere since the beginning of the execution of
project stage. The activity of developing the retro prototyping started just after the job was
awarded to Frank by Cocable. The issue of directly starting the job without doing any cross
verification has happened due to the urgency of starting the job by Frank and also due to urgency
in completing the project as the project delivery date was very tight. So none of the parties were
interested to invest time in developing the project management documents and even they did not
follow any project management methodologies too. All the parties Frank, Cocable and GE were
interested in developing the retro prototyping and neither party interested in developing or
following the project management strategies.
Scope of work was not verified since the start of Retro Prototyping Project
Ever since the work order was awarded to Frank, neither he wanted to cross check the scope nor
did the Cocable also insisted for doing so either with Frank or from their client GE. This was the
major mistake that has arises such a serious conflicts at the end of the project. The scope
verification 2 process that is conducted when the work is in progress and the proper monitoring is
done in Project Management, according to which the stage ask the team to reconfirm the scope
after every stage of progress for its verification and minimize the diversion from the aim or scope
of work.
2

Network Project Management
Stakeholder Identification not performed
The very first step of the project management procedure is the identification of
stakeholders and documents the expectations of the stakeholders. In this stage the
stakeholders were identified, their expectation from the project is documented and the
procedure to meet the expectations is also documented. This stage was totally missing in
this case. If this would have been there, the expectations of GE would have been well
identified before the start of the work.
No communication matrix developed
It is the step in project management which is conducted just after the stakeholder
identification stage. When the types of communications, there procedure, venue and
media are identified3. This stage was also missing in the case. In this case, Frank was
unaware that in case of any issue whom he need to contact in Cocable as per the contract
terms. This became the main reason of the conflict. Now as the issue arises regarding the
scope verification, none of the party is willing to take the ownership, as it was actually
not clear since the beginning. So the identification of roles and responsibilities in
communication matrix is required well before the actual start of job.
Change Control Procedure is missing
This stage is required to be defined at the beginning itself which can help the project in
resolving conflicts in case of any changes occurs in scope of quality requirements in
between the project execution stage4. In current case, since the document is missing, so
no one knows that how to resolve the current issue of increase in the length of model
from 55 inches to 62 inches. Moreover, Frank need to procure many more actuators, and
other related items for the change. So now who will pay for the change remains
unresolved due to the absence of this document.
Recommendations
By looking at the issues which has risen in the case, is because of not following the proper steps of project
management methodology and related techniques. So the project management techniques need to be
followed in every project for the whole life cycle. Otherwise similar issues can always arise.
3

Network Project Management
The lessons learnt from the study can be summarized as, the stakeholder identification, communication
matrix, scope verification and other similar stages of the project management need to be followed since
the beginning of the project till its end.
Conclusion
So now it can be concluded that the whole issues in the current case has raised only because of neglecting
the requirement of project management processes in any project irrespective of its deadline and stringent
requirements. This report has also identified few more stages of improvement required for the proper flow
of work and resolving all probable ways of evolving any issues. Now the issue which remained
unresolved is the finding of the mistake maker that who shall pay for the cause of this conflict and need to
pay for the schedule and cost overrun. After going through the whole case study it can be finalized that it
is not only the fault of Frank who did not crossed checked the scope before start of work, but also of
Cocable who did not demanded any project management documents which are mandatory required before
the start of any activity and similarly the GE, who in turn did not demanded for any king of reporting
system in between the work execution stage, so I feel that all the three parties are equally responsible for
the problem occurred.
References
x
[1] Stratasys. (2017) Rapid Prototyping. [Online]. http://www.stratasys.com/solutions/rapid-
prototyping
[2] Andy Jordan. (2012, October) Scope Verification: The Forgotten Process. [Online].
https://www.projectmanagement.com/articles/275424/Scope-Verification--The-Forgotten-
Process
[3] R. Sheryl. (2011, January) Using the Communications Management Matrix as a Tool.
[Online]. http://www.brighthubpm.com/monitoring-projects/33854-using-the-
communications-management-matrix-as-a-tool/
[4] Cathlynn Carman. (2013, May) 4 Steps to Effective Change Control. [Online].
4

Network Project Management
http://insights.dice.com/2013/05/08/why-change-control-isnt-for-sissies/
x
5