MBA641: Strategic Project Management - DeGrandis Presentation

This presentation provides a comprehensive performance evaluation of DeGrandis Sporting Goods, a fictional Australian retailer. The analysis focuses on three key projects: DeGrandis Running Shoes, Australian Olympic Committee (AOC) Partnership, and Ladybird Sporting Apparel. The presentation assesses each project's alignment with DeGrandis's strategic goals, which include doubling revenue from private label products and building a reputation for high-quality goods. Ethical standards and adherence to the company's code of conduct are also examined. Using the Project Performance Scorecard (PPS), the presentation evaluates each project across dimensions like stakeholders, process, innovation, learning, quality, benefit, and use. The presentation concludes with recommendations for each project, addressing issues such as stakeholder accountability, quality assurance, and ethical practices, ultimately aiming to improve the company's strategic project management and overall performance. References from academic journals and textbooks are included to support the analysis.

Performance Evaluation
Presentation
DeGrandis Sporting Goods
[Student Name] – [Student Number]

Introduction
• DeGrandis Sporting Goods Project
Portfolio:
o Three key projects:
1. Project A – [DeGrandis Running
Shoes]
2. Project B – [Australian Olympic
Committee (AOC) Partnership]
3. Project C – [Ladybird Sporting
Apparel]

DeGrandis Strategic Goals
• Key Strategic Goals:
1. Doubling revenue from sales of
DeGrandis private label product
range within 3 years.
2. Developing strong network with Chinese
Suppliers.
3. Build organisational reputation as the
highest quality sporting goods seller
of Australia.

DeGrandis Ethical Standards
• Key Ethical Standards:
1. Providing users with high quality products.
2. Abiding by the Company’s code of
conduct (Mamic 2017).

Project A: Strategy & Ethics
• Alignment with strategy:
o Aligned with strategy of revenue
generation and delivering quality
products.
• Alignment with ethics:
o Avoiding company’s code of conduct
leading to non-alignment of the ethical
standards.

Project A: PPS Snapshot
Dimension Score Explanation
Stakeholders
2/5 • No consultancy with senior officials during decision making
(Hammond, Keeney and Raiffa 2015).
Project Process 3/5 • Project became Over budget.
Innovation and Learning
4/5 • Developed a new technology themselves.
Quality 5/5 • Got positive reviews.
Benefit 4/5 • Huge increase in company’s revenue.
• Added to firm’s goodwill.
Use 4/5 • Development of new technology and great revenue.
Overall Score
4/5 • Because Expect for the Stakeholder’s flaw the program was
success.
• It added to both Revenue and Image of the firm

Project A: Conclusion
• A good project for the firm in terms of
finance and image.
• Stakeholders should be made
accountable.
• Abiding by the firm’s code of conduct.

Project A: Recommendations
1. Enhance the product sales.
2. Needs to made the stakeholders
accountable towards code of conduct.
3. Proper assessment of organisations
before selecting as a business partner.

Project B: Strategy & Ethics
• Alignment with strategy:
o Aligned with the strategy to generate
revenue and developing of network.
• Alignment with ethics:
o Avoiding company’s code of conduct
leading to non-alignment of the ethical
standards.

Project B: PPS Snapshot
Dimension Score Explanation
Stakeholders 2/5 • Stakeholders made the decision without managerial consent
(Groysberg, Lin and Serafeim 2016).
Project Process 1/5 • The process adopted unethical means and was also delayed
(Gorisa, Denker and Huisman 2018).
Innovation and Learning
4/5 • The project requirement was developed based on stakeholders
involvement and perception.
Quality 3/5 • The quality of the project was high but the bribery scandal raises
question over the quality (Leipziger 2017).
Benefit 3/5 • The firm earned some profit ($3 million).
• Loss the reputation.
Use 2/5 • The project gained firm benefit but loss reputation.
Overall
2.5/5 • The project was success but showed major concerns
regarding the decision making and adoption of unethical
means.
• It hurt the image of the firm in long but the revenue offered
is a perk.

Project B: Conclusion
• The project could have been a huge
success.
• Though, Adoption of unethical practices
did more loss.
• Hence, every contract should be
monitored for quality.

Project B: Recommendations
1. Establishing a body for monitoring the
quality and process of contracting.
2. Should take strict action against the
culprit.
3. Launch a public apology.