MN601: Network Project Management Case Study Report
VerifiedAdded on 2020/02/24
|6
|1156
|328
Report
AI Summary
This report analyzes a case study of a failed rapid prototyping project, focusing on the project management aspects that contributed to its failure. The report begins with an introduction to rapid prototyping and the background of the project, where Frank Billings was tasked by Cocable to create four hardware models. It then identifies several problems, including the lack of scope verification, failure to identify stakeholders during the initiation stage, absence of a defined change control process, and the lack of recognized methodologies and progress measuring techniques. Each problem is discussed with its possible causes, such as the urgency to start and complete the project without proper planning and documentation. The report provides recommendations, emphasizing the importance of scope verification and other project management steps to avoid such failures. Lessons learned from the case include the necessity of scope verification before project initiation and continuous monitoring. The conclusion summarizes the negative effects of starting work without fundamental project management processes. The report highlights the shared responsibility of all parties involved, including Cocable, Frank, and GE, for the project's failure. Finally, the report includes references to support the analysis.

X
University name
MN601 Network Project Management
Rapid Prototyping
Student’s Name: & Date
University name
MN601 Network Project Management
Rapid Prototyping
Student’s Name: & Date
Paraphrase This Document
Need a fresh take? Get an instant paraphrase of this document with our AI Paraphraser

MN601: Network Project Management
Table of Content
Introduction.................................................................................................................................................2
Summary.................................................................................................................................................2
Background..............................................................................................................................................2
Problems & its possible Causes for the failure of project............................................................................2
Scope was not verified at the beginning..................................................................................................2
Stakeholders were not identified during ‘Initiation Stage’......................................................................3
‘Change Control’ Process not defined.....................................................................................................3
No Recognized Methodologies used.......................................................................................................3
Progress Measuring Technique was Missing...........................................................................................4
Recommendations.......................................................................................................................................4
How the problem could have been avoided............................................................................................4
Lessons Learnt from the case..................................................................................................................4
Conclusion...................................................................................................................................................5
Summary of the report............................................................................................................................5
Main Conclusion......................................................................................................................................5
References...................................................................................................................................................5
1
Table of Content
Introduction.................................................................................................................................................2
Summary.................................................................................................................................................2
Background..............................................................................................................................................2
Problems & its possible Causes for the failure of project............................................................................2
Scope was not verified at the beginning..................................................................................................2
Stakeholders were not identified during ‘Initiation Stage’......................................................................3
‘Change Control’ Process not defined.....................................................................................................3
No Recognized Methodologies used.......................................................................................................3
Progress Measuring Technique was Missing...........................................................................................4
Recommendations.......................................................................................................................................4
How the problem could have been avoided............................................................................................4
Lessons Learnt from the case..................................................................................................................4
Conclusion...................................................................................................................................................5
Summary of the report............................................................................................................................5
Main Conclusion......................................................................................................................................5
References...................................................................................................................................................5
1

MN601: Network Project Management
Introduction
Summary
Rapid prototyping is a ceaselessly developing field since when it has begun in the year back
1990. The purpose for winding up such prevalent innovation is that by utilizing Rapid
Prototyping any hardware can be displayed in three dimensional smaller than usual models be it
is to be made of any material and it can be additionally used to comprehend the execution
bends of the genuine gear.
Background
The foundation of current case is, Frank Billings was having adolescence long for taking a shot at
Rapid Prototyping and since old days he was searching for the opportunity 1. After around 3
years of holding up he got break from Cocable to make four such hardware model according to
the particular.
Problems & its possible Causes for the failure of project
Scope was not verified at the beginning
As soon as the work contract was granted to Frank, neither he needed to cross check the
extension nor did the Cocable likewise demanded for doing as such either with Frank or from
their customer GE. This was the significant mistake that has emerges such a strong conflicts
towards the finish of the task2. The verification of scope process that is led when the work is in
advance and the correct checking is done in Project Management, as per which the stage
request that the group reconfirm the degree after each phase of advance for its confirmation
and limit the redirection from the point or extent of work.
Stakeholders were not identified during ‘Initiation Stage’
The initial step of the project administration strategy is the distinguishing proof of
partners and reports the desires of the partners. In this stage the partners were
distinguished, their desire from the task is recorded and the strategy to meet the desires
is additionally reported3. This stage was thoroughly absent for this situation. In the
event that this would have been there, the desires of GE would have been very much
distinguished before the beginning of the work.
2
Introduction
Summary
Rapid prototyping is a ceaselessly developing field since when it has begun in the year back
1990. The purpose for winding up such prevalent innovation is that by utilizing Rapid
Prototyping any hardware can be displayed in three dimensional smaller than usual models be it
is to be made of any material and it can be additionally used to comprehend the execution
bends of the genuine gear.
Background
The foundation of current case is, Frank Billings was having adolescence long for taking a shot at
Rapid Prototyping and since old days he was searching for the opportunity 1. After around 3
years of holding up he got break from Cocable to make four such hardware model according to
the particular.
Problems & its possible Causes for the failure of project
Scope was not verified at the beginning
As soon as the work contract was granted to Frank, neither he needed to cross check the
extension nor did the Cocable likewise demanded for doing as such either with Frank or from
their customer GE. This was the significant mistake that has emerges such a strong conflicts
towards the finish of the task2. The verification of scope process that is led when the work is in
advance and the correct checking is done in Project Management, as per which the stage
request that the group reconfirm the degree after each phase of advance for its confirmation
and limit the redirection from the point or extent of work.
Stakeholders were not identified during ‘Initiation Stage’
The initial step of the project administration strategy is the distinguishing proof of
partners and reports the desires of the partners. In this stage the partners were
distinguished, their desire from the task is recorded and the strategy to meet the desires
is additionally reported3. This stage was thoroughly absent for this situation. In the
event that this would have been there, the desires of GE would have been very much
distinguished before the beginning of the work.
2
⊘ This is a preview!⊘
Do you want full access?
Subscribe today to unlock all pages.

Trusted by 1+ million students worldwide

MN601: Network Project Management
No Recognized Methodologies used
In the agreement granted by the Cocable to Frank, nothing was specified with the
accommodation of task administration archives anyplace since the start of the execution of
project organize4. The action of building up the retro prototyping began soon after the
employment was granted to Frank by Cocable. The issue of straightforwardly beginning the
occupation without doing any cross check has occurred because of the criticalness of beginning
the employment by Frank and furthermore because of direness in finishing the project as the
undertaking conveyance date was tight. So none of the gatherings were intrigued to put time in
building up the task administration reports and even they didn't take after any undertaking
administration approaches as well. Every one of the gatherings Frank, Cocable and GE were
occupied with building up the retro prototyping and neither one of the parties inspired by
creating or following the undertaking administration techniques.
Progress Measuring Technique was Missing
It is the progression in project administration which is led soon after the partner
distinguishing proof stage. This stage was likewise lost for the situation. For this
situation, Frank was unconscious that in the event of any issue whom he have to contact
in Cocable according to the agreement terms. This turned into the primary reason of the
contention. Presently as the issue emerges with respect to the degree check, none of
the gathering will take the proprietorship, as it was really uncertain since the start. So
the distinguishing proof of parts and duties in correspondence grid is required well
before the genuine begin of occupation.
Recommendations
How the problem could have been avoided
In the wake of experiencing the wide range of task administration issues which have occurred in
the project, it can be suggested that the degree check process exhibit in the undertaking
administration book of information is the key of this project. Since the progression was not
taken after the entire vitality contributed towards building up the model has gone to squander.
Well beyond the nonappearance of project confirmation methodology, numerous such task
3
No Recognized Methodologies used
In the agreement granted by the Cocable to Frank, nothing was specified with the
accommodation of task administration archives anyplace since the start of the execution of
project organize4. The action of building up the retro prototyping began soon after the
employment was granted to Frank by Cocable. The issue of straightforwardly beginning the
occupation without doing any cross check has occurred because of the criticalness of beginning
the employment by Frank and furthermore because of direness in finishing the project as the
undertaking conveyance date was tight. So none of the gatherings were intrigued to put time in
building up the task administration reports and even they didn't take after any undertaking
administration approaches as well. Every one of the gatherings Frank, Cocable and GE were
occupied with building up the retro prototyping and neither one of the parties inspired by
creating or following the undertaking administration techniques.
Progress Measuring Technique was Missing
It is the progression in project administration which is led soon after the partner
distinguishing proof stage. This stage was likewise lost for the situation. For this
situation, Frank was unconscious that in the event of any issue whom he have to contact
in Cocable according to the agreement terms. This turned into the primary reason of the
contention. Presently as the issue emerges with respect to the degree check, none of
the gathering will take the proprietorship, as it was really uncertain since the start. So
the distinguishing proof of parts and duties in correspondence grid is required well
before the genuine begin of occupation.
Recommendations
How the problem could have been avoided
In the wake of experiencing the wide range of task administration issues which have occurred in
the project, it can be suggested that the degree check process exhibit in the undertaking
administration book of information is the key of this project. Since the progression was not
taken after the entire vitality contributed towards building up the model has gone to squander.
Well beyond the nonappearance of project confirmation methodology, numerous such task
3
Paraphrase This Document
Need a fresh take? Get an instant paraphrase of this document with our AI Paraphraser

MN601: Network Project Management
administration steps were additionally ignored. By doing this stage verification, GE’s expectation
could also be met.
Lessons Learnt from the case
One regular lesson learnt is the extension confirmation, which must be done well before the
begining of any action, yet additionally there ought to dependably be mindfulness from the
customers to check the transitional strides as well, let the item not be worth to check but rather
still an additional checking could have kept this hopeless circumstance that all are confronting
now.
Conclusion
Summary of the report
In this entire report, we have watched the negative effect of beginning any work without
building up the fundamental project administration processes and the outcomes of not
following the correct methods of project administration techniques.
Main Conclusion
We got the opportunity to feel the significance of degree finish toward the start of the project
and furthermore the confirmation by every one of the gatherings. Presently the basic condition
that who is in charge of the cost and schedule overrun, it seems to be Cocable, but at the same
moment Frank and GE are also have similarly contributed to the cause of conflict.
References
x
[1] Materialise. (2017) Rapid Prototyping. [Online].
http://www.materialise.com/en/manufacturing/rapid-prototyping
[2] Andy Jordan. (2012, October) Scope Verification: The Forgotten Process. [Online].
4
administration steps were additionally ignored. By doing this stage verification, GE’s expectation
could also be met.
Lessons Learnt from the case
One regular lesson learnt is the extension confirmation, which must be done well before the
begining of any action, yet additionally there ought to dependably be mindfulness from the
customers to check the transitional strides as well, let the item not be worth to check but rather
still an additional checking could have kept this hopeless circumstance that all are confronting
now.
Conclusion
Summary of the report
In this entire report, we have watched the negative effect of beginning any work without
building up the fundamental project administration processes and the outcomes of not
following the correct methods of project administration techniques.
Main Conclusion
We got the opportunity to feel the significance of degree finish toward the start of the project
and furthermore the confirmation by every one of the gatherings. Presently the basic condition
that who is in charge of the cost and schedule overrun, it seems to be Cocable, but at the same
moment Frank and GE are also have similarly contributed to the cause of conflict.
References
x
[1] Materialise. (2017) Rapid Prototyping. [Online].
http://www.materialise.com/en/manufacturing/rapid-prototyping
[2] Andy Jordan. (2012, October) Scope Verification: The Forgotten Process. [Online].
4

MN601: Network Project Management
https://www.projectmanagement.com/articles/275424/Scope-Verification--The-Forgotten-Process
[3] Richard Bett. (2017, March) Best Practice – Stakeholder Identification and Management. [Online].
https://bevaglobal.com/blog-4-best-practice-stakeholder-identification-and-management/
[4] Moira Alexander. (2017, July) How to pick the best project management methodology for success.
[Online]. https://www.cio.com/article/2950579/methodology-frameworks/how-to-pick-a-project-
management-methodology.html
x
5
https://www.projectmanagement.com/articles/275424/Scope-Verification--The-Forgotten-Process
[3] Richard Bett. (2017, March) Best Practice – Stakeholder Identification and Management. [Online].
https://bevaglobal.com/blog-4-best-practice-stakeholder-identification-and-management/
[4] Moira Alexander. (2017, July) How to pick the best project management methodology for success.
[Online]. https://www.cio.com/article/2950579/methodology-frameworks/how-to-pick-a-project-
management-methodology.html
x
5
⊘ This is a preview!⊘
Do you want full access?
Subscribe today to unlock all pages.

Trusted by 1+ million students worldwide
1 out of 6
Related Documents

Your All-in-One AI-Powered Toolkit for Academic Success.
+13062052269
info@desklib.com
Available 24*7 on WhatsApp / Email
Unlock your academic potential
Copyright © 2020–2025 A2Z Services. All Rights Reserved. Developed and managed by ZUCOL.