Analysis of Network Project Management Failures and Recommendations

This report examines a network project management failure involving GE, Cocable, and Frank. It analyzes the project's issues, including unclear goals, lack of expertise, risk management problems, and poor communication. The report details the reasons for the project's failure, such as GE's changing specifications and the lack of project management methodologies. It identifies the responsible party for the project's financial repercussions and recommends specific project management strategies to mitigate risks, emphasizing the need for clear goals, communication, and adherence to project management methodologies throughout the project lifecycle. The conclusion stresses the importance of following project management strategies to avoid future failures.

Running head: NETWORK PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Network project management
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author’s note

1NETWORK PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Executive Summary
The project management model and its mentioned procedures should be followed all the time
and every organisation should keep in mind the strategies and methods and should apply
while working on a project. GE, Frank and Cocable should act in accordance to the project
management strategies to successfully execute the project and avoiding any pitfalls. The
report showcased all the project management issues faced by GE, Cocable and Frank and the
reasons for failures. It has also been mentioned that who should pay for the changes. At last,
it has been recommended that which project management strategies they should adapt to
diminish the project risks.

2NETWORK PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Table of Contents
1. Introduction............................................................................................................................3
1.1. Background.....................................................................................................................3
2. The lessons learnt by analyzing a list of project management problems and the reasons
behind those problems................................................................................................................3
2.1. The project management problems related to the scenario.............................................3
2.2. Reasons for the failures of the project.............................................................................4
3. One who is responsible to pay for the changes......................................................................5
4. Recommendations..................................................................................................................5
4.1. The project management methodologies that should have been adpated.......................5
5. Conclusion..............................................................................................................................6
6. References..............................................................................................................................6

3NETWORK PROJECT MANAGEMENT
1. Introduction
The project management model and its mentioned procedures should be followed all
the time and every organisation should keep in mind the strategies and methods and should
apply while working on a project [2]. The following report will grandstand the project of GE
which have failed due to not following the project methodologies properly. The problems,
causes behind the problems and the recommendations have been stated in this report.
1.1. Background
Frank Billings, an ardent rapid prototyping manufacturing aspirant got a job at
Cocable Company after completing graduation, he performed well, but he was not a happy,
his wish was to do a job on rapid prototyping. He abandoned his job and planned to initiate
his own business on rapid prototyping. Meantime, he got another job opportunity from the
same Cocable Company. He had to build rapid prototype machines for the jet engine for GE
at Cocable Company. Though he successfully completed the project but for some
unavoidable circumstances the project failed at the time of testing.
2. The lessons learnt by analyzing a list of project management problems
and the reasons behind those problems
2.1. The project management problems related to the scenario
i. GE having no fair goal: GE provided 62 inches long CAD model during testing but
provided 48 inches long CAD model initially.
ii. Lack of Decency and expertise: The mentioned organisations in this report have
made the blunder but neither of them is willing to take the responsibility of the project failure
[1].
iii. Risk Management problems: GE and Cocable did not have any back up plan to
handle the adverse condition occurred due to the project failure.

4NETWORK PROJECT MANAGEMENT
iv. No contact: GE did not make any further discussion, did not conduct any
meetings, even the project failure they just walked off.
v. Cocable’s dilemma: Cocable said that GE gave them specs and those were of
maximal length, but at the time of testing GE declined that and added that those were just the
samples and not of maximal length [6]. Frank did not know that and built the machines and
those had the capability to test up to 55 inches CAD model and not above that.
2.2. Reasons for the failures of the project
i. GE initially provided Frank with 48 inches CAD model but during testing provided him
with 62 inches CAD model which shows that GE had no fair goal in mind [4].
ii. Both the organisations’ project directors and project managers must have the backup plan
and a risk management plan and they did not have that, the project failed and they had no
further suggestion [7].
iii. GE did not communicate with Frank and never asked for any partial submission that is the
reason why the project failed [3].
iv. The project horribly failed and neither of them is willing to take the responsibility that is a
clear sign of unproductivity.
v. The organisations did not follow any of the project methodologies throughout the project
lifecycle and that is why the project failed miserably [4].
3. One who is responsible to pay for the changes
The two risks have been evolved for the project mishaps-
a. Now there will be a prolonged deadline for the project
b. The project will be way too costly

5NETWORK PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Cocable, Frank, and GE all three are responsible for the project failures since they had
not followed the project management strategies. Since the project belongs to GE, they will
have to take the burden [5]. They have two options, they can hand over the project to
someone else, or they can hand it over to same Cocable and can expect better outcomes,
however, if they chose the first option then they have to pay extra cost to the new company
[8].
4. Recommendations
4.1. The project management methodologies that should have been adpated
GE, Cocable should have followed the project management strategies to successfully
execute the project. GE should have an aim from the start, and then according to the aim, they
should have planned the rest. They should have been clear about the specimens, the size of
specimens when they delivered the specimens to Cocable. Cocable should have sent
deliverables, in this way both the companies could remain assured about the specimens.
Frank on the other side should have performed all the activities on the basis of deliverables.
Frank also should have sent partial to GE on a regular basis instead of submitting all four at
the same time. This approach could save a whole lot of time and money. From now onwards,
they should remain careful and should use project management strategies while pursuing any
project.
5. Conclusion
It can be concluded from the above discourse that the GE, Frank and Cocable should
act in accordance to the project management strategies to successfully execute the project and
avoiding any pitfalls. The report showcased all the project management issues faced by GE,
Cocable and Frank and the reasons for failures. It has also been mentioned that who should

6NETWORK PROJECT MANAGEMENT
pay for the changes. At last, it has been recommended that which project management
strategies they should adapt to diminish the project risks.
6. References
[1] Joslin, Robert, and Ralf Müller. "The impact of project methodologies on project success
in different project environments." International Journal of Managing Projects in
Business 9.2, 2016: 364-388.
[2] Ghafoor, Fawad, Ibrar Ali Shah, and Nasir Rashid. "Issues in Adopting Agile
Methodologies in Global and Local Software Development: A Systematic Literature Review
Protocol with Preliminary Results." International Journal of Computer Applications 160, no.
7, 2017.
[3] Saltz, Jeffrey, and Kevin Crowston. "Comparing data science project management
methodologies via a controlled experiment." In Proceedings of the 50th Hawaii International
Conference on System Sciences. 2017.
[4] Ahimbisibwe, Arthur, Arthur Ahimbisibwe, Urs Daellenbach, Urs Daellenbach, Robert Y.
Cavana, and Robert Y. Cavana. "Empirical comparison of traditional plan-based and agile
methodologies: Critical success factors for outsourced software development projects from
vendors’ perspective." Journal of Enterprise Information Management 30, no. 3, 2017: 400-
453.
[5] Skeggs, Beverley, and Simon Yuill. "The methodology of a multi-model project
examining how Facebook infrastructures social relations." Information, Communication &
Society 19, no. 10, 2016: 1356-1372.

7NETWORK PROJECT MANAGEMENT
[6] Bonner, Nancy A., Nisha Kulangara, Sridhar Nerur, and James TC Teng. "An Empirical
Investigation of the Perceived Benefits of Agile Methodologies Using an Innovation-
Theoretical model." Journal of Database Management (JDM) 27, no. 3, 2016: 38-63.
[7] Hughes, D. Laurie, Yogesh K. Dwivedi, Antonis C. Simintiras, and Nripendra P. Rana.
"Project failure and its contributing factors." In Success and failure of IS/IT projects, pp. 3-
25. Springer International Publishing, 2016.
[8] Patwardhan, Amol, Jon Kidd, Tiffany Urena, and Aishwarya Rajgopalan. "Embracing
Agile methodology during DevOps Developer Internship Program." arXiv preprint
arXiv:1607.01893, 2016.