Project Management Report: Analyzing the Triple Constraint Framework

This report delves into the triple constraint framework in project management, focusing on the critical elements of cost, time, and scope. It uses the Denver International Airport's baggage handling system project as a case study to illustrate the impact of these constraints on project success and failure. The report analyzes the issues that led to the project's delays and cost overruns, highlighting the importance of effective planning and strategic decision-making. It also provides examples from other industries, demonstrating the practical application of the triple constraint model. The conclusion emphasizes the significance of strategic decision-making and centralized control in managing projects effectively. This analysis is intended to provide students with a comprehensive understanding of the triple constraint model and its implications in real-world project scenarios. The report provides valuable insights for students seeking to learn about project management.

Running head: TRIPLE CONSTRAIN FOR PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Triple Constrain For Project Management
Name of student
Name of University
Author’s Note

TRIPLE CONSTRAIN FOR PROJECT MANAGEMENT1
Introduction
The report is based on the case study of – Denver International Airport Baggage Handling
System of the project regarding the technology failure. The airport was supposed to be the largest
airport in the United State but unfortunately the project plan fail. This report will provide
information for any successful completion of the project and the importance of the triple
constrains key elements that must be handled in an effective manner.
Issues based on the case study
In the plan, for the team of the project management airport’s critical component was the baggage
handling system. Due to the delay of opening of the airport for about 16 months, the loan had
cost to Denver city of about $1.1 M per day with the interest charges on the construction and the
expenditure for the maintenance of the empty airport (Swartjes et al. 2017). This has happen
because the complexity of the project was underestimated. It was an impossible task to complete
the system of Denver within two years and the project completion was insufficient and resulted
in schedule pressure. Thus, the main causes of the problems were the shortcuts taken by the team
and made a mistake to meet the impossible time schedule. With the correct strategy and with two
additional years it would have helped the designer to understand the complexity and agree or
overcome it with the stakeholders (Oduor 2015).
Importance of Triple Constrain
This section will provide the importance of triple constrain for a project management. The three
elements of triple constrain namely cost, time and scope has considered in managing any project
(Serrador and Turner 2015). The first key attribute is the schedule or time that refers the actual
deliverable time require for the project. The time required for deliverable directly related to the

TRIPLE CONSTRAIN FOR PROJECT MANAGEMENT2
requirement of the scope and the cost of the resources allocated with the project. The second key
attribute is the cost or resources in which the estimation has to be provided based on the amount
of money required for the completion of the project. Cost includes the resources, risk estimates,
rates of labor contractor, materials bill and lot more. Finally, the last key attribute is the scope or
quality which is the functional elements for completion of the project with the end deliverables.
The scope generally identified to achieve success in the project. Many of the stakeholders use the
concept of scope creep if they need any changes in the project during the life cycle of the project.
Understanding triple constraints with other examples
The triangle constrain of the project has become codified to the manufacturing industry (Pascu
2015). From children toys to auto parts to airplanes the triple constrain has used during the
production that resulted the project to get a finished product. There are certain constrains a
project has to carry out- traditionally, they include scope, cost and time. These three elements are
commonly known as ‘the triple constrain’. Each of this constrain in the project has to be
delivered on time, within the cost and has to meet the scope that had agreed with the quality of
the customer requirements. Suppose, if a software company is considered, where they are
creating some update in relation to the mapping software . This software includes original scope
with detailed geo-locations, traffic real time information, interactive directions and
enhancements. While developing the project, the developer realizes that the functionality of real-
time traffic will take more resources and time to accomplish (Akyildiz et al. 2016). Therefore,
the decision was taken to keep the functionality out of the deliverables and updates the rest on
time and budget and they have considered updating the feature of the real-time traffic in the
future (Karlsson et al. 2014).

TRIPLE CONSTRAIN FOR PROJECT MANAGEMENT3
Conclusion
After studying the case study it can be concluded that when examined the critical decision it was
clear the reason behind the failure of the project. In a project planning before starting any project,
a strategic decision needs to make to set the direction of the project. However, in the case of
DIA, instead of making a strategic decision, it has made a strategic error which have resulted in a
project “flip-flop”. Since the decision timing was extremely poor, the change in the strategic
could have made some sense, as it requires a centralized control from the team of the airport’s
Project Management to run the project.

TRIPLE CONSTRAIN FOR PROJECT MANAGEMENT4
References
Akyildiz, I.F., Lee, A., Wang, P., Luo, M. and Chou, W., 2016. Research challenges for traffic
engineering in software defined networks. IEEE Network, 30(3), pp.52-58.
Karlsson, J., King, K., Viswanathan, R., McInerney, T., Slocum, D., Phillips, T. and Bingham, J.,
2014. Being Prepared for IROPS: A Business-planning and Decision-making Approach.
Transportation Research Board.
Oduor, J., 2015. Stakeholders'participation In Planning And Designing Of Locally Based Undp
Projects: A Case Of Ministry Of Disasters And Refugees Affairs (Midimar). European Journal of
Business and Social Sciences, 4(08), pp.141-153.
Pascu, R.V., 2015. Particularities of implementing a sustainable management system in
universities. Academic Journal of manufacturing Engineering, 2(13), pp.104-111.
Serrador, P. and Turner, R., 2015. The relationship between project success and project
efficiency. Project Management Journal, 46(1), pp.30-39.
Swartjes, L., van Beek, D.A., Fokkink, W.J. and van Eekelen, J.A.W.M., 2017. Model-based
design of supervisory controllers for baggage handling systems. Simulation Modelling Practice
and Theory, 78, pp.28-50.