Maximum megahertz project case study solution

8/12/2017 University of Phoenix: Project Management: The Managerial Process

https://phoenix.vitalsource.com/#/books/1259822338/cfi/6/50!/4/304/2@0:68.0 1/39

Page 510

PRINTED BY: lttlemntate@email.phoenix.edu. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

CHAPTER FOURTEEN

Project Closure

Project Closure Types of Project Closure Wrap-up Closure Activities Post-Implementation Evaluation Retrospectives Summary Appendix 14.1: Project Closeout Checklist Appendix 14.2: Euro Conversion

8/12/2017 University of Phoenix: Project Management: The Managerial Process

https://phoenix.vitalsource.com/#/books/1259822338/cfi/6/50!/4/304/2@0:68.0 2/39

Page 511

PRINTED BY: lttlemntate@email.phoenix.edu. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to relive it. —George Santayana, 1863–1952

Every project comes to an end eventually. But how many project participants get excited about closing out a project? The deliverables are complete. Ownership is ready to be transferred. Everyone's focus is what's next— hopefully a new, exciting project. Carefully managing the closure phase is as important as any other phase of the project. Observation tells us that organizations that manage closure and review well prosper. Those who don't tend to have projects that drag on forever and repeat the same mistakes over and over.

Closing out a project includes a daunting number of tasks. In the past and on small projects the project manager was responsible for seeing all tasks and loose ends were completed and signed off. This is no longer true. In today's project-driven organizations that have many projects occurring simultaneously, the responsibility for completing closure tasks has been parsed among the project manager, project teams, project office, an oversight “review committee,” and an independent retrospective facilitator. Many tasks overlap, occur simultaneously, and require coordination and cooperation among these stakeholders.

The three major deliverables for project closure are described below (see Figure 14.1):

1. Wrapping up the project. The major wrap-up task is to ensure the project is approved and accepted by the customer. Other wrap-up activities include closing accounts, paying bills, reassigning equipment and personnel, finding new opportunities for project staff, closing facilities, and the final report. Checklists are used extensively to ensure tasks are not overlooked. In many organizations, the lion's share of closure tasks are largely done by the project office in coordination with the project manager. The final report writing is usually assigned to one project office staff member, who assembles input from all stakeholders. In smaller organizations and projects, these closure activities are left to the project manager and team.

FIGURE 14.1 Project Closure and Review Deliverables

8/12/2017 University of Phoenix: Project Management: The Managerial Process

https://phoenix.vitalsource.com/#/books/1259822338/cfi/6/50!/4/304/2@0:68.0 3/39

Page 512

2. PRINTED BY: lttlemntate@email.phoenix.edu. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

Evaluation of performance and management of the project. Evaluation includes team, individual team members, and project manager performance. Vendors and the customer may provide external input. Evaluation of the major players provides important information for the future.

3. Retrospectives. Retrospectives of lessons learned are designed to improve performance on current and future projects. Today, most retrospectives are the responsibility of an independent facilitator. The facilitator also provides major input to the closure report that will include lessons learned. These post- project reviews should be held with the team to catch any missing issues or gaps.

This chapter begins with the recognition that projects are shut down for many reasons. Not all projects end with a clear “Finished” and are turned over to a customer. Regardless of the conditions for ending a project, the general process of closure is similar, though the endings may differ significantly. Wrap-up closure tasks are noted first. These tasks represent all the tasks that must be “cleaned up” before the project is terminated. Evaluation of project performance is next. Finally, lessons learned or retrospective methods are examined in detail.

Types of Project Closure On some projects the end may not be as clear as would be hoped. Although the scope statement may define a clear ending for a project, the actual ending may or may not correspond. Fortunately, a majority of projects are blessed with a well-defined ending. Regular project reviews will identify projects having endings different from plans. The different types of closure are identified here:

Normal The most common circumstance for project closure is simply a completed project. For many development projects, the end involves handing off the final design to production and the creation of a new product or service line. For other internal IT projects, such as system upgrades or creation of new inventory control systems, the end occurs when the output is incorporated into ongoing operations. Some modifications in scope, cost, and schedule probably occurred during implementation.

Premature For a few projects, the project may be completed early with some parts of the project eliminated. For example, in a new product development project, a marketing manager may insist on production models before testing:

Give the new product to me now, the way it is. Early entry into the market will mean big profits! I know we can sell a bazillion of these. If we don't do it now, the opportunity is lost!

The pressure is on to finish the project and send it to production. Before succumbing to this form of pressure, the implications and risks associated with this decision should be carefully reviewed and assessed by senior management and all stakeholders. Too frequently, the benefits are illusory, dangerous, and carry large risks.

Perpetual Some projects never seem to end. The major characteristic of this kind of project is constant “add- ons,” suggesting a poorly conceived project scope. At some point the review group should recommend methods for bringing final closure to this type of project or the initiation of another project. For example, adding a new feature to an old project could replace a segment of a project that appears to be perpetual.

8/12/2017 University of Phoenix: Project Management: The Managerial Process

https://phoenix.vitalsource.com/#/books/1259822338/cfi/6/50!/4/304/2@0:68.0 4/39

Page 513

PRINTED BY: lttlemntate@email.phoenix.edu. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

SNAPSHOT FROM PRACTICE Project Canceled*

Germany is the major crossroad for Europe's international commercial trucks. The German government felt the need to have international trucks (over 12 tons) using their road infrastructure assist in paying for the road maintenance and additional new infrastructure. The project objectives were clear—a new electronic truck toll-collection system that ensures accurate charges and easy fee collection across German, Swiss, and Austrian highways by August 31, 2003. The technology relied on global positioning systems (GPS), telecommunications, and software to record miles and charges, without using toll booths along the highways.

Several problems sabotaged the project. Time-to-market deadlines were impossible to meet. Delayed launch dates were caused by technical problems with truck tracking units and software that failed to function as expected. Interface communication with public and private stakeholders failed. As a result, the August 2003 deadline was never met. The revised November 2003 deadline was not met. Finally, in March 2004 the German government pulled the plug and canceled the project.

The cancellation of the project had serious impacts on other governmental programs. The shortfall of not receiving the revenue from the new toll system is estimated at $1.6 billion. Some of those revenues were destined for a high- speed maglev train in Munich and other infrastructure projects.

Lessons learned reveal that lack of project management knowledge was evident. More importantly, failure to identify and assess the impact of schedule and complex technology risks resulted in the death of the project. Perhaps a simpler, cheaper microwave system recommended by the Swiss and Austrians to be operational by 2005 would have sufficed. See http://www.tollcollect.de/frontend/HomepageVP.do:Jsessionid-F840E12142D.

* “Case Analysis: Taking a Toll,” PM Network, Vol. 18, No. 3, March, 2004, p. 1.

Failed Project Failed projects are usually easy to identify and easy for a review group to close down. However, every effort should be made to communicate the technical (or other) reasons for termination of the project; in any event project participants should not be left with an embarrassing stigma of working on a project that failed. Many projects will fail because of circumstances beyond the control of the project team. See Snapshot from Practice: Project Canceled.

Changed Priority Organizations’ priorities often change and strategy shifts directions. For example, during the 2008–10 financial crisis organizations shifted their focus from money-making projects to cost savings projects. The oversight group continually revises project selection priorities to reflect changes in organizational direction. Projects in process may need to be altered or canceled. Thus, a project may start with a high priority but see its rank erode or crash during its project life cycle as conditions change. When priorities change, projects in process may need to be altered or canceled.

Different types of project termination present unique issues. Some adjustments to generic closure processes may be necessary to accommodate the type of project termination you face.

Wrap-up Closure Activities

http://www.tollcollect.de/frontend/HomepageVP.do:Jsessionid-F840E12142D
8/12/2017 University of Phoenix: Project Management: The Managerial Process

https://phoenix.vitalsource.com/#/books/1259822338/cfi/6/50!/4/304/2@0:68.0 5/39

The major challenges for the project manager and team members are over. Getting the project manager and project participants to wrap up the odds and ends necessary to fully complete a project is often difficult. It's like the party is over—now who wants to help clean up? Much of work is mundane and tedious. Motivation can be the chief challenge. For example, accounting for equipment and completing final reports are perceived as dull administrative tasks by project professionals who are action-oriented individuals. The project manager's challenge is to keep the project team focused on the remaining project activities and delivery to the customer until the project is complete. Communicating a closure and review plan and schedule early allows

8/12/2017 University of Phoenix: Project Management: The Managerial Process

https://phoenix.vitalsource.com/#/books/1259822338/cfi/6/50!/4/304/2@0:68.0 6/39

Page 514

PRINTED BY: lttlemntate@email.phoenix.edu. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

the project team to (1) accept the psychological fact the project will end and (2) prepare to move on. The ideal scenario is to have the team member's next assignment ready when project completion is announced. Project managers need to be careful to maintain their enthusiasm for completing the project and hold people accountable to deadlines, which are prone to slip during the waning stages of the project.

Implementing the closure process includes several wrap-up activities. Many organizations develop lengthy lists for closing projects as they gain experience. These are very helpful and ensure nothing is overlooked. Implementing closedown includes the following six major activities:

1. Getting delivery acceptance from the customer. 2. Shutting down resources and releasing to new uses. 3. Reassigning project team members. 4. Closing accounts and seeing all bills are paid. 5. Delivering the project to the customer. 6. Creating a final report.

Administering the details of closing out a project can be intimidating. Some organizations have checklists of over 100 wrap-up tasks! These checklists deal with closure details such as facilities, teams, staff, customer, vendors, and the project itself. A partial administrative closure checklist is shown below in Table 14.1.

Getting delivery acceptance by the customer is a major and critical closure activity. Delivery of some projects to the customer is straightforward. Others are more complex and difficult. Ideally there should be no surprises. This requires a well-defined scope and an effective change management system with active customer involvement. User involvement is critical to acceptance (see Snapshot from Practice: New Ball Goes Flat in the NBA).

TABLE 14.1 Wrap-up Closure Checklist

8/12/2017 University of Phoenix: Project Management: The Managerial Process

https://phoenix.vitalsource.com/#/books/1259822338/cfi/6/50!/4/304/2@0:68.0 7/39

8/12/2017 University of Phoenix: Project Management: The Managerial Process

https://phoenix.vitalsource.com/#/books/1259822338/cfi/6/50!/4/304/2@0:68.0 8/39

Page 515

PRINTED BY: lttlemntate@email.phoenix.edu. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

SNAPSHOT FROM PRACTICE New Ball Goes Flat in the NBA*

On October 31, 2006, the National Basketball Association (NBA) opened its 57th season with new official game balls. The new ball, manufactured by Spalding, featured a new design and a new material that together was believed to offer better grip, feel, and consistency than the previous leather ball. The material is microfiber composite with moisture management that provides superior grip and feel throughout the course of a game. Additionally, the new composite material eliminates the need for a break-in period, which is necessary for the current leather ball, and achieves consistency from ball to ball.

The NBA and Spalding subjected the ball to a rigorous evaluation process that included laboratory and on-court testing process. Every NBA team received the new ball and had the opportunity to use it in practice. The ball was also tested in the NBA summer development league.

At the press conference announcing the shift from leather to microfiber balls, NBA commissioner David Stern pronounced “The advancement that Spalding has made to the new game ball ensures that the best basketball players in the world will be playing with the best basketball in the world.”

Animal rights advocates applauded the shift from leather to microfiber. Such was not the case for the players who would actually use the new ball. Grumblings emerged immediately when training camps opened in October. Washington Wizards guard Gilbert Arenas said the new basketball gets slippery when it comes in contact even with small amounts of sweat. Then Miami Heat center Shaquille O'Neil said “it feels like one of those cheap balls that you buy at a toy store.”

Some players, including league MVP Steve Nash, began complaining that the new ball was producing small cuts on their hands, “It's awful, (the friction burns) its like an irritant… sometimes I even have to tape my fingers in practice.” Perhaps LeBron James from the Cleveland Cavaliers best summed up the players attitudes toward the NBA's introduction of the new ball when he said “You can change the dress code, you can make our shorts shorter, but when you take our basketball away from us, that not a transition we handle.”

On December 1, 2006, four weeks into the season the NBA players union filed an unfair labor practice suit because the league management switched to the new ball without consulting the players. Ten days later, the NBA announced that they would revert back to the old leather ball beginning January 1st 2007. In a terse statement, Commissioner David Stern said “Our player's response to this particular composite ball has been overwhelmingly negative and we are acting accordingly.”

The failure to check with the players (the end-users) and get buy-in for the new basketball was loudly criticized by the press. “How they could actually even get it that far and not have run it by the players is just an amazing, amazing exercise in ineptitude,” Rob Frankel, a Los Angeles–based branding expert told Bloomberg News.

* “NBA Introduces New Game Ball”, www.nba.com/news, posted 6-28-2006; Howard Bloom, “The NBA-uneventful 2006 II,” Sports Business News, www.sportsbixnews.blogspot.com. 12-30-2006.

The conditions for completing and transferring the project should be set before the project begins. A completed software program is a good example of the need to work out the details in advance. If the user has problems using the software, will the customer withhold final payments? Who is responsible for supporting and training the user? If these conditions are not clearly defined up front, getting delivery acceptance can be troublesome.

http://www.nba.com/news
http://www.sportsbixnews.blogspot.com/
8/12/2017 University of Phoenix: Project Management: The Managerial Process

https://phoenix.vitalsource.com/#/books/1259822338/cfi/6/50!/4/304/2@0:68.0 9/39

Another delivery tactic (briefly mentioned in Chapter 7) for a project that has been outsourced is known as build, own, operate, and transfer (BOOT). In this type of project the contractor builds, owns, and operates the project deliverable for a set period of time. For example, Haliburton will operate a hydro-electric plant for six months before turning over operations to their Indian counterparts. During this time all the bugs are worked out and conditions for delivery are satisfied. Again, note the delivery conditions need to be carefully set up before the project begins; if not, wrap-up activities can develop a life of their own.

https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/books/1259822338/epub/OEBPS/17_chapter07.xhtml#chap7
8/12/2017 University of Phoenix: Project Management: The Managerial Process

https://phoenix.vitalsource.com/#/books/1259822338/cfi/6/50!/4/304/2@0:68.0 10/39

Page 516

PRINTED BY: lttlemntate@email.phoenix.edu. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

Releasing the project team typically occurs gradually during the closure phase. For some people, termination of their responsible activities ends before the project is delivered to the customer or user. Reassignment for these participants needs to take place well before the final finish date. For the remaining team members (full or part time), termination may result in a new project or returning to their functional job. Sometimes, on product development efforts, team members will be assigned to operations positions and play an active role in the production of the new product. For contract people it may mean the end of their assignment to this project; in some cases there may be follow-up work or user support possibilities. A small number of part-time participants may be recommended to the user organization to train or operate new equipment or systems.

Since many work invoices are not submitted until after the project is officially over, closing out contracts is often messy and filled with untied ends. For example, it is improbable all invoices have been finalized, billed, and paid. Further, when contractors are used, there is a need to verify that all the contracted work has been done. Keeping contract records, such as progress reports, invoices, change records, and payment records, is important should a compliance or lawsuit occur. Too often in the haste to meet deadlines, paperwork and record keeping gets short changed, only to create major headaches when it comes time for final documentation.

There are many more wrap-up activities; it is important to complete all of them. Experience has proved time and again that not doing all the little cleanup tasks well will create problems later. Two other examples of closure checklists are shown in this chapter: Appendix 14.1 presents an example used by the state of Virginia and Appendix 14.2 presents an abridged closure checklist for the Euro Conversion project. The final wrap-up activity of closure that provides a clear signal that the project is truly over is submission of the final project report.

Creating the Final Report The final project report summarizes project performance and provides useful information for continuous improvement. Although the final report will be customized to your project and organization, the content of the final report typically includes the following topics: executive summary, review and analysis, recommendations, lessons learned, and appendix.

Executive Summary This summary simply highlights the key findings and facts relating to the project implementation. For example, the project goals for the customer were met, or not. Are stakeholders satisfied that their strategic intents have been met? What has been user reaction to quality of the deliverables? Are the project deliverables being used as intended and providing the expected benefits? Final time, cost, and scope performances are listed. Any major problems encountered and addressed are noted. Key lessons learned are identified.

Review and Analysis Data are collected to record the project history, management performance, and lessons learned to improve future projects. Analysis examines in detail the underlying causes of problems, issues, and successes. The analysis section includes succinct, factual review statements of the project—for example, project mission and objectives, procedures and systems used, and organizational resources used. It is common to collect data from the organizational view and from the team view. The project office or closure facilitators often use questionnaires and surveys to pick up on issues and events that need to be examined further. For example, “Was

https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/books/1259822338/epub/OEBPS/24_chapter14.xhtml#app14.1
https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/books/1259822338/epub/OEBPS/24_chapter14.xhtml#app14.2
8/12/2017 University of Phoenix: Project Management: The Managerial Process

https://phoenix.vitalsource.com/#/books/1259822338/cfi/6/50!/4/304/2@0:68.0 11/39

Page 517

PRINTED BY: lttlemntate@email.phoenix.edu. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

the organizational culture supportive and correct for this type of project? Why? Why not?” Or, “Did the team have adequate access to organizational resources—people, budget, support groups, equipment?” The project office also provides project schedules, cost comparisons, scope data, and other needed data to tell the story of performance. This information is used to create a final project report.

Recommendations Usually, review recommendations represent major improvement actions that should take place. They are often technical in nature and focus on solutions to problems that surfaced. For example, to avoid rework, the report for a construction project recommended shifting to more resilient building material. In other cases, they may include terminating or sustaining vendor or contractor relationships.

Lessons Learned Perhaps lessons learned are the most valuable contribution of the closure process. Given the process evaluation and input from the stakeholder meetings, lessons learned should be succinctly and clearly set out. Stress the need to help others in future projects. In practice, new project teams studying past project reports similar to the project they are about to start have found past review reports very useful. Team members will frequently remark later, “The recommendations were good, but the ‘lessons learned’ section really helped us avoid many pitfalls and made our project implementation smoother.” It is for precisely this reason that lessons learned in the form of project retrospectives have taken on greater prominence in the field and warrant an extended discussion at the end of this chapter. See Snapshot from Practice: Lessons Learned from Katrina.

Appendix The appendix may include backup data or details of analysis that would allow others to follow up if they wished. It should not be a dumping ground used for filler; only critical pertinent information should be attached.

Post-Implementation Evaluation The purpose of project evaluation is to assess how well the project team, team members, and project manager performed.

Team Evaluation Evaluation of performance is essential to encourage changes in behavior and to support individual career development and continuous improvement through organizational learning. Evaluation implies measurement against specific criteria. Experience corroborates that before commencement of a project, the stage must be set so expectations, standards, supportive organizational culture, and constraints are in place; if not, the effectiveness of the evaluation process will suffer.

In a macro sense, the evidence today suggests that performance evaluation is not done well. See Research Highlight: Measures of Team Performance. The major reasons cited by practitioners are twofold:

1. Evaluations of individuals are still left to supervisors of the team member's home department. 2. Typical measures of team performance center on time, cost, and specifications.

Most organizations do not go beyond these measures, although they are important and critical. Organizations should consider evaluating the team-building process, effectiveness of group decision and problem-solving processes, group cohesion, trust among team members, and quality of information exchanged. Measurement of customer and user satisfaction with project deliverables (i.e., the project results) is often missed completely. Yet, project success depends significantly on satisfying these two very important groups. The quality of the deliverables is the responsibility of the team.

8/12/2017 University of Phoenix: Project Management: The Managerial Process

https://phoenix.vitalsource.com/#/books/1259822338/cfi/6/50!/4/304/2@0:68.0 12/39

Page 518

PRINTED BY: lttlemntate@email.phoenix.edu. Printing is for personal, private use only. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted without publisher's prior permission. Violators will be prosecuted.

SNAPSHOT FROM PRACTICE Lessons Learned from Katrina*

On August 25, 2005, winds of 145 miles per hour and rains covered 80 percent of New Orleans with some areas under 20 feet of water. Hurricane Katrina dispersed havoc on every corner of New Orleans. In its trail it left over 1,300 people dead in Louisiana and Mississippi. Katrina will long be remembered as the costliest and most deadly hurricane ever recorded in the United States.

Response came from many different groups from within the country and from other countries. Katrina also drew the largest response of The National Guard to a national emergency in history. Governors from every state sent National Guard troops to support and assist the state of Mississippi. By September 8, 51,000 troops were responding to the emergency. Many other nonprofit groups offered help in a variety of ways—food, shelter, financial, health care, and transportation. Groups that contributed support have reviewed their efforts to see what lessons learned can be used to improve future emergency efforts. The results of the review of The National Guard efforts follow here:

Three of the key lessons from The National Guard retrospective are described.

Lack of equipment was one of the biggest problems—especially communication equipment. Ability to communicate among the many different support groups (e.g., civilian and military) was thwarted by incompatible systems or simple lack of availability.

Action Item: $1.3 billion has been authorized for new equipment that is compatible across major emergency groups. Lack of protocols and standardization of reports, graphics, and communication caused delays and poor coordination among the many support groups.

Action Item: A single standard protocol for all states is now being applied. The National Guard is under state control. Guard troops integrated quickly into the host-state command structures and cooperation ensued.

Action Item: Maintain status quo.

Because Guard soldiers are controlled by the states, they were empowered to enforce civil laws, something federal troops are prohibited from doing, except under the provisions of the insurrection laws. Fortunately, coordination and cooperation among state and federal troop command work reasonably well. However, the federal agencies (e.g., Homeland Security) need to incorporate the Guard into planning and preparation for the federal response to catastrophic disasters.