Introduction:
The SST BI Phase I project focuses on outsourcing some of the key Business Process Consulting (BPC) functions. The BPC will then work on an individual basis thereby identifying and managing weaker sections of the organisation and showcasing the same to the management. My role as a Project Manager will be to co-ordinate between the teams of the consulting and the in-house departments to help them improve their existing processes and work on streamlining the same for better base and quality. I act as a SPOC (specific point of contact) who will help synchronise the workflow between the various teams. As a project manager I will document and set the approval process for weighing the scope.
Project Management:
The project involves creation and setting up of a new data warehouse within the existing technical framework which will enhance the reporting functions in the nearing time. The performance of the project will directly impact the business. As stated by Venkatraman and Prescott (1990) the organisation must focus on improving the potential abilities with a strong cost structure to depend on for which resource allocation is extremely crucial. A failed project is the lack of efficient project management (Applegate et al. 1996). This is where the project manager’s role becomes crucial. This project is termed as Phase I which will have a reliable reporting and business intelligence system that will be advanced and quick. This will result in better business decision making for the management. The objective of the project is to install a data warehouse on a Microsoft 2012 SQL Server Platform, Share point, file transfer and others. Planning the project proved to be a major challenge as being in the role of the Project Manager I had to meticulously plan the tasks in the required order. For this I used PERT (Program Evaluation and Review Technique) which essentially helped in creating the best suited methodology to accomplish the project on time and with quality results as promised. The PERT specifically helped to analyse the time needed for every important task and also to chart the co-ordinated tasks which could be finished simultaneously thereby giving us more time and opportunity to review and improvise the work being done.
Team Member Dynamics:
Every team comes with its own set of strengths and workable weaknesses. The team was highly skilled which made the project proceed smoothly. By choosing the right resources with the needed knowledge and skills helped in the fact that several unexpected issues that were identified during the course of the project were resolved efficiently with excellent solutions. Also the team was quite experienced which boosted the morale of the team in tough situations. There were situations when the team was under pressure given the time lags and unexpected problems cropping up.
We used good communication and motivation techniques to ensure that the workers stay as highly motivated as possible. As a project leader I drafted clear instructions that would cover the basic queries and encouraged an atmosphere that encouraged the team to come and speak about their problems to me openly without any kind of hesitation. This made me address the issues right in the initial stages and worked out well bringing in good results. Regular feedback helped me gauge the amount of stress the team is in and I would try and give small breaks to ensure that the team also feels relaxed in between and outs in the best of their efforts.
Team composition and process:
The team was diverse and had a good mix of people with suitable skills and characteristics. The success of a project is directly related to the hard and soft skills of the manager and the team (Kirsch, 2000).
One key factor that worked well was hiring a fresher in my team who helped me thoroughly to frame the Work Breakdown Structure (WBS). Since the fresher was curious to learn and absorb new concepts he was always willing to rework and improve on the mistakes made. This way the WBS formulated had very realistic estimates and proves to be a beneficial tool used during the course of the project. However the reverse effect was that the time consumed to create the WBS took more than what was expected since there was rework. The fresher also had to be explained and trained on several new things which he was unaware of. This accounted to loss of time though the fresher gradually became a good and a reliable resource. Given the fact that time is a crucial element in project management I must have hired an experienced person and could have saved the time lag completely. I could have also focused on other key issues rather than training the fresher and making him understand the nuances of the project. As put forth by Shenhar (2001) a project varies in terms of scale, funding, scope, technology while the team has a different level of familiarity with the tasks assigned to them. Keeping this in mind the decision was neither good nor bad.
Detailed Learning Analysis:
Tsai, Moskowitz and Lee (2003) claim that „the failure of software development projects is often a result of inadequate human resource project planning‟ (p.167). The team composition was quite scattered and varied. The project deadline was one year and the team consisted a business analyst, three developers and two testers apart from the project manager. This list does not include the outsourced resources. A technical project can be seen as a firm within the framework of an organisation that is completely different in terms of its roles and responsibilities. As advocated by Pagell and colleagues (2000) there exists a connection between job requirements and the skills of the team members for which the project manager has to be extremely knowledgeable with an unfailing attitude. Managing the team was the biggest challenge along with several factors to be included such as stress, morale, motivation, workload amongst other factors. At times the objective of the project at a specific stage would get prolonged considering the time differences and the skewness of the team. This was one of the biggest challenges as the entire success of the project depends on the expert team members. The time difference at times made co-ordination tougher which impacted the tasks assigned to the other team members located in a different location. It affected the team meetings which is crucial for brainstorming and coming to a collective process decision. However, we made the best of the available choices and tried to fit in a weekly call on a regular basis at a fixed time to fill in the gaps if there were any.
The team composition was put into effect with the help of the model developed by Ahn et al (2007). The model identifies three crucial dimensions that are needed for an efficient team. The dimensions being: Reliability, Quality and Availability. Every team member is judged and weighed on the basis of these dimensions. The project criteria is also taken into account while prioritising the dimensions. Based on the ratings gained in the test the members with highest scores are selected for the team. This method is reward oriented where the team and the manager are rewarded when they excel and are fined when they don’t. The reward is decided based on the work quality that is delivered.
This method is scientific and considers the top three dimensions needed while selecting a team. It helps in formulating a driven team that will encourage the overall performance and will help in retaining a positive work culture across locations.
Reliability: This is one of the key factors that is required in a team member by a project manager. The candidate must be able to accept responsibilities and take up work and finish it as agreed. The project ca be delivered only when the team is full of dependable team members who can agree to do what they are ideally supposed to do.
Quality: By simply agreeing to do something is not what the project expects. Delivering quality results in the stipulated time is a trait that the team must comprise of and that will also determine the performance of the project in whole.
Availability: It is also important that the team member is available for discussions, meetings and similar sessions that will help in contributing to the project with a much more balanced approach.
As per the model the rates are given to each team member based on these factors. The rates are then weighed and added. If there are too less scores marked against the team members then the process is repeated or else tried with a new set of candidates. There are although several other factors that are not considered in the model. It considers the emotional quotient of the team and tries to build a platform that is judged using the same. This created several issues during the course of the project. Any project will comprise of four important elements: Project properties, personal traits, data usage, and team member selection. But since the challenge was figuring out the right team composition, only the personal traits were taken into consideration. Factors such as location, cultural diversity and related ones were ignored given the fact that the project had to be delivered with high quality results despite the differences.
The team composition was split as per the mentioned categories: Gender, Age, Experience, Locations. Gender at times posed as a challenge as female employees could not extend their working hours beyond a certain point which was understandable. So in such situations the male colleagues were requested to pitch in and do the needed activities. This at times was questioned and the team members had to be communicated the needs and the necessities. Age was another challenge. While the fresher were willing to try the experienced felt stretched as they had to carry out the assigned duties and also audit the work done by the new joiners. The task assignment had to extremely dynamic and was altered several times to suit the team. When I quote experience as a tough factor it is basically to do with the ego of the team members which had to be handled very sensitively. Locations to be precise was the biggest challenge of them all. The time difference made the team come together and everything was virtual which at times made team bonding an impossibility.
With the given fact that the project involves outsourcing activity, the onshore and offshore activities made it tough to manage the overall team. As put across by Swanson and Beath (1990) the role of the project manager is not only restricted to the project but also considers the previous experience. However it is also not totally mandatory. But the familiarity especially for such software projects makes it convenient and is also very crucial (Espinosa, et al. 2007). In this scenario another point to be noted is the fact about the reward system associated with the model. For this specific model when the team performs the reward is handed across but also at the same time when the team lags in performance review it is then fined. This includes the project manager either ways. Considering the rewards however the model factors only three personal dimensions which is not completely agreeable to. During the course of the project there were instances when the team had not performed up to the mark. In those situations the team was penalised and this affected the morale of the team members. I had to deal with formulating internal achievements and had to convince the team to achieve them and give more importance to the internal objectives rather than the others. This helped the team to garner the lost confidence and perform better in the next level of assessment.
Communication proved to be a crucial component which was effectively used at every stage of the project. As elucidated by Kraut and Streeter (1995) the project manager has to encourage sensible communication methods to achieve the set objectives.
Conclusion:
The project introduced me to several opportunities and challenges in equal proportions. The positive point was that I got to learn new techniques such as PERT, GANTT charts, deep analysis, time management, setting objectives and handling the team efficiently. Apart from these, managing the diverse team was the biggest challenge. Co-ordinating amongst team members, selecting the performers, boosting their morale and motivating them to achieve better were some of the human resources techniques that I learnt. Even though the theory “Attitude driven team formation using multi-dimensional trust” was utilised it was later realised that it only covered the emotional aspects while the project attributes were blurred.
References:
Ahn, J., DeAngelis, D. and Barber, S. 2007. Attitude Driven Team Formation using Multi-Dimensional Trust. IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Intelligent Agent Technology. Silicon Valley, USA. pp. 229-235.
Applegate, L. M., R. Montealegre, H.J. Nelson, C. Knoop. 1996. BAE Automated Systems (A): Denver
International Airport Baggage-Handling System. Harvard Business School Case # 9 pp. 396-311.
Boh, W.F., S.A. Slaughter, J. A. Espinosa. 2007. Learning from experience in software development: a
multilevel analysis. Management Science 53(8) pp. 1315-1331.
Kirsch, L. J. 2000. Software Project Management: An Integrated Perspective for an Emerging Paradigm. In: R. W. Zmud, ed., Framing the Domains of IT Management: Projecting the FutureThrough the Past. Cincinnati, OH: Pinnaflex Educational Resources, pp. 285-304.
Kraut, R.F., L.A. Streeter. 1995. Coordination in software development. Communications of the ACM
38(3) pp. 69-81.
Pagell, M., R.B. Handfield, A.E. Barber. 2000. Effects of Operational Employee Skills on Advanced
Manufacturing Technology Performance. Productions and Operations Management 9(3) pp. 222-237.
Shenhar, A.J. 2001. One Size Does Not Fit All Projects: Exploring Classical Contingency Domains.
Management Science 47(3) pp. 394-414.
Swanson, E.B., C.M. Beath. 1990. Departmentalization in software development and maintenance.
Communications of the ACM 33(6) pp. 658-667.
Tsai, HT., Moskowitz, H. and Lee, LH. 2003. Human resource selection for software development projects using Taguchi’s parameter design. European Journal of Operational Research 151: pp. 167-180.
Venkatraman N., J.E. Prescott. 1990. Environment-Strategy Co-alignment: An Empirical Test of Its
Performance Implications. Strategic Management Journal 11(1) pp. 1-23.
