Sydney Opera House Project: Executing and Closing Projects Report

This report provides a critical analysis of the Sydney Opera House project, focusing on the causes of its significant cost and time overruns. It examines the project's initial scope, budget, and timeline, highlighting the substantial discrepancies between the planned and actual outcomes. The report delves into the range of control systems used and their effectiveness in managing cost, schedule, scope, and quality. It analyzes the reasons behind the overruns, including design changes, stakeholder conflicts, and a lack of technical expertise. The analysis extends to the project execution team's responsibility for the delays and increased costs, as well as the influence of various stakeholders, including the government and the project team. Furthermore, the report explores potential project management actions that could have been taken to better control the project and suggests improvements in communication, planning, and risk management. The conclusion emphasizes the importance of adhering to fundamental project management principles to avoid similar failures in the future.

Executing and Closing projects
SYDNEY OPERA HOUSE

Introduction to the project
 Construction initiated in 1959
 Project was actually scheduled for four years
along with a budget of AUS $7 million
 Completion of the project cost AUS $102 million
 Completion of the project exceeded the actual
deadline
 Client changed the plan in the middle

The range of used control systems for cost, schedule,
scope and quality
 That government of New South Wales decided to
invest $100,000 in the project as it felt it had an
obligation to public to choose the existing affairs
 Cost of project estimated $5.5 million but the initial
cost of stage 1 was estimated around AUD$1.3 but
this has increased to $2.5 million and by the first
stage works left 47 weeks behind schedule and it was
over the budget
 There is a large gap between the actual cost and the
estimated cost of the project

Contd...
 Almost 233 entries were received from 32 different
nations
 Half 3000 seats as well as a small hall for almost
1200 people and each was supposed to be designed
for different categories of use with the inclusion of
full scale opera, orchestral and choral concern,
lecture and mass meeting, bullet performance and
lecture

Analysis of the reasons that explaining the cost and/or
time overruns encountered during the project
 Initial stage effectively claimed extra cost of AUD$1.2 million in 1962 because of the
changes in design but when the project was accomplishment
 It had cost an estimated amount of AUS$5.2 million
 Stakeholder Utzon submitted an updated estimate of overall project which cost as
AUD$1.2 million
 Utzon was under bankruptcy during the making of the project

Contd..
 Utzon submitted an updated estimate of overall project which cost as AUD$1.2
million
 Freeman, (2017) argued that stage II certainly slowed down the progress of the
project in 1996
 Consequently, Uzton walked out of the project, the stakeholder did not leave any sort
of design or the sketches to work with as the this stakeholders did not leave the
sketch to work because he was convinced

Extent to which the project execution team could be
held responsible for time and cost overruns
 Government of the nation is probably a definitive stakeholder, showing power,
legitimacy, urgency because they were given the responsibly of facilitating the
creation of such project
 Angus, Flett and Bowers (2005) mentioned that stakeholders who were involved in
the investment planning and the construction engineers who planned the projects
were the major stakeholders
 Final product has successfully met the demands and expectation of Opera goers and
the architectural community of the world and of course the expectation of Australian
Government. Gann and Salter (1998) sated the fat that Australia government
recouped the enormous cost after only two years.

Difference between actual cost and time
and estimated ones

Relationship between the problems I have identified in section 3
above and the stakeholders’ needs and influence
 Although, cost and time were two big issues, it received a tremendous attention from the global
audience
 As put forward by Gann and Salter (1998), one of the major stakeholder is client who was
basically the state of New South Wales which is in fact the Australian Govt. So, this stakeholder
groups started the project but ultimately become an obstacle in the timely completion of project
by determining changes to existing plans

Contd..
 Major client of the project changed the existing plan in the middle due to the delay
in first two theatre
 Major relation which was missing in the project is the interactive relations between
project team and the demands of client
 Sydney Opera House Committee were not aware of the technical needs for building
up the project
 The project execution team wanted to finish the project within the given time period
but gap of technical expertise remained as the challenge.

Project management actions that could have
been taken to better control
 Sydney Opera House is more of a well-developed team of architect, engineers and
constructors
 None of the individuals in the execution of the team and even in the external environment
have predicted what could have happened and this scenario gradually and ironically
proved to be a major issue during the construction
 Cost as AUS $12.5 million and as more payment were being delivered and no visible
progress was observed, the government of the nation started to withdraw payments to
Stakeholder

Contd..
 Knowledge and skill tools should be applied to complete the project. Had this knowledge and
skills are applied to the project, it would have taken shorter to complete the project as well as
within budget affecting the quality
 Developing a management principle is highly critical because it is majorly concerned with the
development of communication and reporting procedures
 Communication of the project status could be applied in the existing stage as well and it can
inform the team about the financial status and time required