BLUE SPIDER PROJECT

1. INTRODUCTION
Project Management deals with the planning, organizing, directing and controlling of
company resources for short-term objective which is established to complete specific
goals and objectives. It is cross functional teams that are assembled to achieve a specific
purpose are the bases of project management. Projects are accomplished usually in
specific time and within limited budget.
The aim of projects is to produce deliverables. These deliverables which are measurable,
tangible outputs come either at the completion or end of life-cycle phase of the project. A
person who is assigned as the project manager may very well be assigned based upon the
size, nature and scope of the deliverables. To be effective as a project manager, an
individual must have management as well as technical skills. To be a good project
manager, one should have a good knowledge of human behavior, organizational behavior,
interpersonal relations and communications.
This paper reviews the approaches taken by Parks Corporation, a corporation that
attempts to be a Project Oriented-Organization, in the execution of an R&D project, the
Blue Spider Project that involved the improvement of the Spartan missile structural
capabilities. At the core of this analysis is a critical evaluation of the project management
approaches taken by the organization based on the overall failure of the project in
satisfying the customer and the breakdown of the project management system
implemented and to identify the gaps and opportunities and present a recommendation
that wills fast-track the move of Parks Corporation to become a Project OrientedOrganization.
2. AS-IS ANALYSIS OF THE PROJECT
Parks Corporation as a company grew into a major electronics and structural design
corporation and structural design corporation during the big boom of the late 1950s and
early 1960s when Department of Defense (DoD) contracts were plentiful.

During
1

recession time, it had major layoffs and decided to get out the Research and Development
business and compete at the low-cost production.

In 1975, the Corporation decided to

change its corporate strategy. There has been a new evaluation criterion which set forth
for contracts awards that those companies winning the R&D and qualification phases had
a definite edge on being awarded the production contract. With the new strategy, Parks
began to beef up its R&D engineering staff by luring some employees from competitors,
administering new salary program and job upgrading.
After the necessary preparations, Parks Corporation decided to compete for phase I of the
Blue Spider Project, an R&D project, which has an objective to improve the structural
capabilities of the Spartan missile. Lord Industries was the prime contractor for the
Armys Spartan Program.
Parks Corporation was interested in the projects because this project will lead into a $500
million program spread out over 20 years.

Therefore, Parks Corporation upper

management did not want to lose this opportunity and even risked its reputation by
falsifying the technical specifications to win the bid and enter into business. As it is, the
proposal submitted by Parks Corporation was accepted and it was officially announced
that the Blue Spider project was awarded to Parks Corporation.
A project manager with an R&D background was assigned; team to support the project
was established even though the engineering managers were reluctant to give up their
people to this particular project.

With all its shortcomings the project was started.

Customer requirements were not met, a number of discussions were held, Parks
Corporation has to spend more than what it has allocated for this project, and customer
also started to threaten the stoppage of this project. The team working on this particular
project specially the project manager was frustrated. Due to his limited expertise in
project management skills, he could no longer be in control of the whole situation. He
had to withdraw from his position as a project manager.
Spartan missile is a short range tactical missile used by the army.

However, it is

exhibiting fatigue failure after six years in the field. This was three years less than what
the original design specification called for.

Therefore the Blue Spider project was

initiated with the objective to improve the structural capabilities of the Spartan missile.
2

Lord Industries is the prime contractor for the Armys Spartan Program. The RFP for the
Blue Spider Project was issued by the Lord Industries with a 30 days response period.
The Blue Spider Contract was awarded to Parks Corporation with 10 months Research
and Development effort negotiated $2.2 million at a firm-fixed price.
If the Research and Development Project effort is successful this project will lead to $ 500
million program spread over 20 years.
For the purpose of the Project Gary Anderson, who has an R&D background and who was
most qualified in plant chosen by the Director of Engineering to head up the Project. If
the Research and Development Programme is finalized successfully, the Blue Spider
Project will have a great potential for ongoing business over ten years. Gary Anderson
formed a team from different sections of the company to support the project.
The technical specifications stated that all components must be able to operate normally
and successfully through a temperature range of 650 F to 1450F. However, current testing
indicated that Parks Corporations design would not function above 1300F. An intensive
R&D effort was conducted over the next three weeks. In of the meetings before the final
submission of the proposal, Gary was forwarding his concern about the specification
requirements emphasizing unless they change their design material or incorporate new
materials; the project will not be possible. However, he was further informed that, they
should proceed with the proposal without informing the customer about the specifications
and go ahead with the proposal.
3. SWOT ANALYSIS
Inorder to conduct the SWOT analysis it is critical to look at the different dimensions of
an organization starting with the strategy of the company and evaluate the performance of
Parks Corporation in each light.
Organizational Strategy
At the heart of the Parks Corporation, corporate strategy is a focus on being a production
oriented company that leverages the R&D function as an entry point to win contracts that
could land the company the final production phase where the expected revenue is huge.
3

As a consequence, the organization had to recruit staffs, who are less experienced since
the mature ones cost more money, and relocate to South Africa with R&D residing within
the engineering function.
Though the Parks Corporation acknowledged the necessity of the R&D function to drive
the business entry point into the production of big projects, the level of independence and
structural positioning given to it has undermined its potential to add value to the business.
Project Organizational Structure
The use of the matrix organizational structure in project management gives organizations
leverage in the form of using the skill pool that is available in the different functional
areas of the business, while maintaining their cost base. With the same view point, Parks
Corporation had adopted the structure with the use of the multi-disciplinary team
members such as R&D, Engineering, Quality Control, Manufacturing, Purchasing and
Finance.
The lack of clarity or authority provided to the project manager, Gary Anderson, to be a
full fledge project manager clearly indicates the lack of a proper definition of the roles
and responsibilities of the individual members of the project team as the attainment of the
individual phases of the work to be accomplished still remained with the functional
managers, who retained the last say on who will be involved in the project team, that
created a void as the members could be changed depending on the pressures of the
functional work area.
Additionally, the accountability of the project manager to be focused on the cost and
quality of the project, while the assistant project manager focuses on the technical area
and reports to the engineering manager, indicates a further gap in the clarity of the
organizational structure to meet the project objective.
Human Resources Management
One of the biggest gaps seen in the Blue Spider Project starts with the role and
responsibility clarity provided both to the project manager as well as the team members
through the use of a clear guideline on the procedures and processes of the project
management as well as the relevant working structures in the matrix organization. Even at
4

the onset, the selection criteria used for the project manager is based on the assumption
that a good production engineer will be a good project manager, clearly indicating the
lack of succession planning, as Gary has not been afforded the chance to develop as a
project manager but was placed in a position of risk both to the project and his career.
The qualified engineers the company has and the successful projects made are some of the
factors contributed to the companys good name. The other strength we see is the R&D
infrastructures the company possesses; material test and other experiments were made at
home, in the companys laboratory. Besides, the company operates in diversified sector,
R&D as well as production, this enables the company enjoy the benefits of diversified
strategy.
The organizational structure is matrix wherein the whole Engineering department is under
the Director with subgroups supporting both production (HVM) and R&D. All the people
working on the Blue Spider Project had two bosses and if they were working on more
than one project they could have had even more. The key players involved with the Blue
Spider Project did not clearly understand the distinction between what and how and thus,
the conflicts between Anderson and the functional managers were escalated. Parallel
chains of commands diminish the authority of project managers and compromise
efficiency by having two centers of power. Conflicting instructions from different heads
will lead to confusion and institutional paralysis.
Success of the Blue Spider Project depended on the ability of Anderson and the
willingness of the functional managers to cooperate. But this did not occur very often if at
all. Personnel working on the project reported to their functional managers who had
objectives that sometimes did not coincide with Andersons objectives on the Blue Spider
Project. There was also little or no understanding of the relationships between the
different functional organizations and this created communication problems between
Anderson and the other team members, as well as the other functional managers.
What is unusual is for a high ranked director to be over involved with one of the projects
R&D stage although it was his initial idea. It would have been good for a director to drive
and manipulate the project and his involvement should have only been through technical

guidance and not actually doing all the "engineering", as it overlapped with other engrs
working on the project and often bypassed Gary's authority.
Governance
The Ethical issues related to the Blue Spider Project become apparent during the
preparation of the proposal where Henry Gable was untruthfully win the proposal. This
was unethical to Gary at first but he agreed because he has no choice as told him to find
someone else as project manager.
During the 9th month of test, when the result number became as shock to Gary he decided
not telling the truth to anyone and he took all responsibilities by himself. Even Paul
Evans told him to tell to everyone who is responsible specially the top managers.
Project Charter
There was no set objective and plan drawn as to what and how to accomplish out of the
Blue Spider and thus, there were also lacks of priorities, no schedule, no communication
plan, and weak cooperation from other departments.
Though assigned by them, Gary did not get support in establishing the project team,
resource allocation and planning of the project as a whole. They were lack of upper
management support and weak direction. They were not fully involved. Besides, though
the project lacks support from top management high involvement from the functional
manager, director of engineering was interruptive. Even though one director could not
represent the top management of PC, integrity of the management questionable as the
director of engineering from the beginning starts with unethical behavior and working
principle.
Supply Chain Integration
Regarding opportunities, the company has got many things to take advantage from. One
of this is Department of Defense contracts are plentiful and secondly, the award for the
production phase. Comparing to the entire project budget; what is spent in the R&D is a
very small amount. If the company successfully completed the first phase of the project;
there is a possibility of taking part on the next phase, which is production. The other thing
6

is, the project is a very good opportunity for the company to prove itself and establish
good relationship with the customers, there by maintains its reputation.
There is also number of threats at hand. There is a possibility of backward integration. In
addition, there is also possibility of losing the customer, Lord and other customers as a
result of the way the project is treated. There is also a possibility of defiling the
companys good name. Losing reputation and losing customers means losing future profit.
4. EVALUATION OF BLUE SPIDER PROJECT MANAGEMENT
4.1.
BLUE SPIDER PROJECT
4.1.1. Project with strategic emphasis
As per Graham and Englund (2004) giving strategic emphasis in project
management starts from linking projects to organizational strategy. A good
project manager without good project or vice versa does not contribute to
successful completion of projects in turn hindering the corporate strategic
fulfillment of an organizations mission. Hence, organization should formulate
systems to give strategic emphasis in project management in order to achieve
objective of an organization.
This systematic approach of project management is usually considered good
approach of project management (Graham and Englund, 2004). But it demands
collaboration of the top management as project team and in turn devoting
resource towards the achievement of the organizations common goal.
The first step in establishing system approach is linking projects to
organizational strategy. Most projects are managed independently apart from
organizational strategy that leads to their failure. The first cause of failure of
projects is lack of set objectives. Hence, if projects are linked to organizational
strategy it would be easier to set objective in line with the objective and goal
of the organization. This helps one who is member of the project to understand
how s/he is part of the big organizational goal and strive toward contributing to
this goal than considering the project as an independent and additional
workload. Project teams as well as managers go for cooperation than blame
and abandoning the other project during resource sharing. Hence, cooperation

would be easier avoiding success at the expense of others failure. (Graham

and Englund, 2004).
If common goal and cooperation are obtained next step would be a process for
project selection and prioritization. Projects should be aligned with their
respective contribution to the strategy of the organization and chosen based on
the capacity of the organization, what can be done and how. Care should be
taken to accommodate opportunities. After prioritization decision is passed
implementing the project follows. Many projects can be done simultaneously
due to the need and the competition the organization is in. Hence, strategic
balancing and aligning functional resources is mandatory to be successful in
project implementation. Top management can handle this by different
mechanisms as decreasing the number of projects at organization wide,
reducing the number of projects per person and building an extra capacity to
accommodate as much as possible. (Graham and Englund, 2004).
Top management should not scatter projects after choosing and prioritizing
which projects to pursue but should give the required support at all times
specially difficult situations.
As to Graham and Englund (2004) Projects should have organizational wide,
long-term emphasis and should have full top management support in terms of
resource allocation, planning, setting goals and objectives of projects in a way
to fit organizational goals. Projects should be integrated in organizational
structure and business management models and processes in order to be
successful as a whole.
Giving strategic emphasis to a project has great value for project success. It is
vital to work together with plan, to motivate the working team, to allocate
resources, to influence the team and to give solution.
4.1.2. Project management without strategic emphasis
It is not customarily to see all projects managed strictly with strategic
emphasis. Some if not most are without strategic emphasis. Sequential steps
(growth) of those projects run by organizations that lack strategic emphasis are
depicted with the following figure. Project lacking strategic emphasis looks
like:
8

Figure 1: Growth of projects in organizations without strategic emphasis

1. Project
creeps

2. Find
Victim

3. Train
Project
Managers

4. Fight

5.
Blame

6. Get new
leader

Source: Graham and Englund, (2004)

It is worth discussing all the above sequential growths below as elaborated by
Graham and Englund, (2004)
1. Project creep sets in: first of all projects are suddenly come out in
response to unexpected change in or outside the organization. Functional
departments will be occupied with sudden and over lapped responsibilities.
2. Find victim(s): for those suddenly brought forward projects someone has
to be there to run it somehow someway, hence, assignment of accidental
project manager follows. Mostly this selection falls on technical people
than managerial and or administrative people. This is the major cause of
failure both at organizational and individual level.
3. Train project managers: The above problem starts to be vivid and hence
management prepares training for the above so called victims(s). This
creates its own complication in terms of gap between top managers as well
as the victims(s) expectations of success out of the training. But since they
cannot be experts on project management overnight with such training
alone and/or the incompatibility of the training with actual project
environment frustration arises on both the victim(s) and the management.
4. Fight: The above frustration on both sides leads to lack of appetite on the
part of the top managers to support the victims both unintentionally and/or
intentionally due to lack of confidence on the project managers and the
project itself. This lack of support from the top management leads to lack
of resource prioritization in turn leading to conflict between project
managers themselves.
5. Blame: This fight and conflict leads to blame for failure.
6. Create New leader: The project and the team pauses because of the blame
for failure, hence top management will be forced to involve to rearrange
the project managers and the team.
At this point, it should be good starting point to learn from ones failure and
should wake up to devote the management in systematizing the projects to
9

strategy and lead towards achieving organizational goals through projects.

Hence, the link between projects and strategy starts from step one again.
4.1.3. Approach of blue spider project
Parks Corporation approached Blue Spider Project not as one of the portfolio
of several projects. Rather the project is creeped from the tender issued by
DoD. Top managements participation in prioritizing any projects is not seen.
There were lacks of priorities, no schedule, no communication plan, weak
cooperation from other departments.
Though there is the matrix structure for project management in Parks the
director of engineering considered Blue Spider Project as his baby rather than
the whole team of the top management. The project manager, Gary Anderson,
was appointed randomly based on his expertise on technical knowledge and
age only mainly by the Director of engineering and the Director of project
management. Though assigned by them, Gary did not get support in
establishing the project team, resource allocation and planning of the project as
a whole. They were lack of upper management support and weak direction.
They were not fully involved.
Since Gary was best engineer he was perceived to be good project manager
which later resulted to failure on part of the organization and individual
frustration.

Instead of establishing the necessary project team, he was

expected to force his friends to meet the required standards. Later, it is noted
that Gary could not force them rather lack of cooperation and coordination
resulted. And he was even forced to do most of the task by himself resulting in
excessive workload and disorganized management of the project.
There was no set objective and plan drawn as to what and how to accomplish
out of the Blue Spider. Hence, the whole effort resulted in additional cost in all
terms. Due to lack of plan, one of which was lack of communication plan,
doubt and fear arose on the part of the client. On top of the excessive work
load, Gary hold this doubt and fear resulted in demanding requirements by the
client which the project team has to adhere to. This should have been set at the
start of the project. Even the client doubted the integrity and capability of the
10

project team and set a direct communication mechanism with the technical
staff of PC.
Most of the communication was informal resulting in lack of information
within the project team itself which later cost them time and money. They
could not stick to deadlines due to this communication problem which also
resulted in lack of cooperation to worsen the project environment.
Besides, though the project lacks support from top management high
involvement from the functional manager, director of engineering was
interruptive. Even though one director could not represent the top management
of PC, integrity of the management questionable as the director of engineering
from the beginning starts with unethical behavior and working principle. This
resulted in running out of budget, schedule and losing its goodwill. Even
frustration by all parties involved in the project and failure on part of PC was
worth to mention.
There was no clearly drawn role, responsibilities and accountability. Blue
spider project was not embedded in the business or project management model
of PC. It is an independent task of one functional department mainly the
engineering.
In case of the blue spider, the project management grows to all the above
discussed six consecutive project management without strategic emphasis
steps. That is, the project is accidental baby to the engineering department
arising from the rumor of tender to be issued by the Department of Defense
(DoD). Secondly, the project manager, Gary Anderson, was assigned
accidently by Henry Gable, the director of engineering, and the Director of
Project Management due to his technical expertise and excellence in R&D.
Though he is not sent to specific training, lack of management support was
major frustration point for Gary when he has repeatedly failed even to contact
the director of engineering who was claiming the project to be his own baby.
Even nowhere in the case was mentioned other top management and the
project directors support toward the project in leading hand and resources to
Gary. Third, due to this lack of support Gary started blaming the team and the
11

functional departments and they in turn blamed Gary holding him responsible
for all the causes of the problem and the failure as a whole. At this stage as we
saw from the case the project and the team were trapped and the director of
engineering took over the project from Gary, who was assigned back to his
previous post.
The whole cycle shows the reason for the failure of the project and the project
manager (the victim), in our case Gary. Hence, the need for strategic emphasis
of project management in PC becomes inevitable from this critical failure
point

4.2.

PC AS POO
4.2.1. Concept of POO
According to Gareis (2000), Project-Oriented Organization (POO) is defined
as an organization that has the following characteristics:
- defines Management by Projects as an organizational strategy;
- applies temporary organizations for the performance of complex processes;
- manages a project portfolio of different project types;
- has specific permanent organizations to provide integrative functions;
- applies a New Management Paradigm (lean management, total quality
Management (TQM), business process re-engineering and learning
-

organization);
has an explicit project management culture; and perceives itself as projectoriented.

Based on the above characteristics of Project-Oriented Organization, one can

see the specific organizational strategy of the POO to be management by
projects. This organizational strategy is characterized by permanent and
temporary organizational structures and by a culture based on a new
management paradigm as depicted in Figure 2 below:
Figure 2: Strategy, Structure and Culture of the POO

12

Source: Gareis (2000).

The brief explanation of strategy, structure and culture of POO is outlined by
Gareis (2000) in the following paragraphs.
a)

Management by Projects: The Organizational Strategy of the ProjectOriented Company

Project-oriented companies consider projects not only as tools to perform business
processes of medium and large scope but as a strategic option for the
organizational design of the company. By applying a management-by-projects
approach, the following organizational objectives are pursued:
-

Organizational

differentiation

and

decentralization

of management

responsibility

b)

Quality assurance by project teamwork and holistic project definitions

Goal orientation by defining and controlling project objectives

Personnel development in projects

Organizational learning by projects

Temporary Organizations of the POO

The POO perceives projects and programs as temporary organizations for the
performance of complex processes. In the organizational chart of the POO, in

13

addition to the permanent organizational structures temporary organizations will

be shown as Figure 3

Source: Gareis (2000)

c)

Culture: New Management Paradigm

The project-oriented company is characterized by the existence of an explicit
project management Culture. New management concepts, such as lean
management, Total Quality Management, the learning organization, and business
process reengineering, introduce new approaches. Among the common features of
these new management approaches are the following:
-

The use of the organization to create competitive advantage

The empowerment of employees

Process orientation and teamwork in flat organizations

Continuous and discontinuous organizational change

Customer orientation, and networking with clients and suppliers

4.2.2. Processes of the Project-Oriented Organization (POO)

14

The POO is characterized by specific business processes. A process model of the POO
can be visualized in a spider web. The axes represent the specific processes of the
POO.
Figure 4: Model of POO

Source: Gareis and Huemann (2000).

Project management is the core business process of the POO. The project management
process starts with the formal project assignment and ends with the project acceptance
by the project owner. The project management consists of the sub-processes such as
project start, project co-ordination, project controlling, project discontinuity
management and project close-down. The project management process starts with the
formal project assignment and ends with the acceptance of the project results by the
project owner as shown in Figure 5.

15

Figure 5: The project management process

Source: Gareis and Huemann (2000)

4.2.3. What Parks Corporation (PC) should do to become a modern POO?
Parks Corporation (PC) does not possess sufficient skills and abilities to manage
projects. Henry Gable, the director of engineering recognized the problem PC had in
project management and convinced the vice-president, Ms Esther Mokonyane, to turn
PC into modern fully fledged Project Oriented Organization (POO). For this
Luthando, Prinsloo & Gopal (Pty) Ltd, an executive project management company is
hired to give professional support on what PC should do to become a modern project
oriented organization-POO?
The consulting firm studied PCs project management competence on the ongoing
Blue spider project and found out the following:

16

a)

Strategy: By considering the strategic importance of R&D in PC, the Blue

Spider Project should be given strategic emphasis to get full support and
participation of the whole organization. Thus, there is no indication that other
senior management team participated on the project.
This project is going to be my baby all the way Henry Gable
Moving from a non-project environment to a full-fledged project oriented
organization requires active leadership from top management. Graham and
Englund (2004) argue that: although project managers are mostly closely
responsible for the success of projects, upper managers ultimately create an
environment for project success. PCs senior management should apply
management by projects as a management strategy of its business. To
communicate this management strategy internally and externally the following
paragraph should be included in the mission statement of PC as stated by
Gareis (1989).
We are a project-oriented company. We establish projects for the performance
of complex tasks of small, medium and large volume. Our project management
culture is developed continuously. We apply project-management methods and
procedures according to specific project requirements.

b)

Organizational Structure: The organizational structure chosen by PC is

matrix structure. The matrix structure requires close cooperation between the
project and the functional organizations. However from the case we can see
the domination of project by the functional organization. The Blue Spider
Project has got only the support of the engineering department and did not
guarantee the support of others.
Our resources are committed until a month from now You cant expect to
simply call a meeting and have everything reshuffled for the Blue Spider
Programme. (Production Manager)
To apply management by projects strategy organizational structure that
supports this strategy should be established. This is achieved by establishing
17

temporary organizations for the performance of complex and new processes in

addition to the permanent functional organization.
c)

Culture: The project management culture of PC, i.e. forms of communication,

roles, techniques, documentation standards etc. were not suitable for proper
management of projects. There is no systematic program for recruiting and
training professional project managers and no career path for project
management. Gary Anderson, the Blue Spider Project manager, was not
assigned for his experience and ability to manage projects.
You were selected because of your age and because all of our other
programme managers have worked only on production-type programmes. We
need someone at the reins who knows R&D. (Director of Engineering)
The changes necessary to become a fully-fledged POO requires a new culture.
To ensure the creation of a culture that supports project oriented organization,
PC should apply New Management Paradigm approaches such as:
-

process-orientation,

empowerment of employees,

team work in flat organizations,

customer-orientation,

organization as competitive advantage,

networking with clients and suppliers

In addition, PCs senior management should adopt and apply the following
components of an environment for successful projects as discussed by Graham and
Englund (2004):
-

The change to project-based organizations,

Strategic emphasis of projects,

Understand upper management influence,

18

Develop a core team process,

Organize for projects management,

Develop a project management information system,

Develop a plan for project manager selection and development,

Develop a learning organization,

Develop a project management initiative,

Develop project management in the organization.

5. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

5.1.

CONCLUSION
a)

The Blue Spider Project was not given strategic emphasis to get full support
and participation of the whole organization.

b)

Assignment of project manager

The reason that Henry got the promotion is because he went beyond his roles
and responsibilities as an Engineering Director in his involvement in the Blue
Spider Project, coming up with the idea, aggressively pushing for it and
executing all the engineering activities and succeeding proves that he is
exceeding expectations beyond his portfolio. Unlike Gary which portfolio is
to be a project manager, he didn't deliver to his basic expectations. Gable
want Gary to be program manager because he had ulterior reason/hidden
reason what he did on proposal/and his age/younger/ the counterpart R&D
type. To fight fire with fire, Paul Evans has been through this path before.

c)

Organizational structure
The org structure is matrix wherein the whole Engineering Department is
under the Director with subgroups supporting both production (HVM) and
R&D. All the people working on the Blue Spider Project had two bosses and
if they were working on more than one project they could have had even
19

more. Parallel chains of commands diminish the authority of project

managers and compromise efficiency by having two centers of power.
Conflicting instructions from different heads will lead to confusion and
institutional paralysis.
d)

Receive top management support

When Parks Corporation was ready to bid for the Blue Spider Project, the
project received the necessary support to prepare the proposal. The director for
engineering even ensured that a great proposal manager was part of the team.
However, when the project was awarded to Parks Corporation and staffing
requirements were being prepared, there was a decline in the support. In
addition, the director of engineering was always unavailable.

e)

Ensure effective planning

Unexpected changes in plans may cost money. For example, at least 500
sheets of paper are redone every time there are reschedule mixes.

f)

Open line of communications internally and with client

Poor communication and lack of consultative forums hamper the
effectiveness of a teams progress. On many occasions, Gary failed to keep
his colleagues informed about the projects performance and only approached
them when faced with challenges. Lack of adequate communication among
various departments has been the root cause for the over burden caused to
Gary Anderson the program manager. There has a communication
breakdown both internally within the departments associated with project and
also with the client. Last minute updates about major functional changes are
the main cause for the breakdown of communications among various
departments. Being a project manager, Gary was the not informed about the
new test material, JXB-3 until he took an initiative to go to test lab. People
from Production and Engineering departments, all had one thing to say in
common, which was Why am I the last person to know about this
change? The reluctance of client to accept the alternate test matrix before
20

the 180 day second milestone clearly shows the poor level of communication
the project management had with the client. New and unorthodox changes are
to be notified to various functional departments well in advance. The R&D
team, Production and Engineering departments should work in unison with
the common interest of project.
g)

Establish clear roles and responsibilities

The testing engineer feels the director for engineering is suppressing
individuality among the highly competent personnel. He also feels that the
meetings are non-value adding to him. He is content with simply receiving
the minutes and not attending the meetings anymore.

h)

Delegate responsibility
At the start of the project, Gary devoted his time on research and assigned the
administrative work to project office personnel. Towards the end of the
project, he focused his attention on administrative tasks and was not abreast
with progress of the project.

i)

Ethical dimension
The Ethical issues related to the Blue Spider Project become apparent during
the preparation of the proposal where Henry Gable was untruthfully win the
proposal. This was unethical to Gary at first but he agreed because he has no
choice as told him to find someone else as project manager.
During the 9th month of test, when the result number became as shock to Gary
he decided not telling the truth to anyone and he took all responsibilities by
himself. Even Paul Evans told him to tell to everyone who is responsible
specially the top managers.

21

5.2.

RECOMMENDATION

1. Parks Corporation (PC) corporate strategy previously focused on bidding on the

production phase of large programs. It is now designed to be aligned to satisfy the

new evaluation criteria set forth for contract awards, those companies winning the
R&D and qualification phases had a definite edge on being awarded the production
contract.
a. Based on PC corporate strategy, the Blue Spider Project should be given
strategic emphasis to get full support and participation of the whole
organization. There is no indication that the upper management team except
Henry Gable, the director of engineering, participated on the project.
b. The upper management of PC didnt act to solve the confusion around
projects. There is little participation in planning and implementation of the
project. This includes making available the necessary resources, especially in
providing adequate staffing, time and budget.
c. PC also didnt have core teams to support the Blue Spider Project. It would
guarantee the full support of organization members towards the project. The
Blue Spider project is continuously expressed as Henry Gables baby not as
one of the children of the PC.
d. PC uses matrix organizational structure for all its projects which requires close
cooperation between the project and the functional structure of the
organization.

The Blue Spider Project has got only the support of the

engineering department and didnt guarantee the support of others.

22

e. The company has no established project management information system.

Blue Spider Project has no clear standardized line of communication. That is
why the project is not prepared to answer stakeholders questions regarding
progress, schedules and resource requirement.
f. PC has no system for developing project managers. There are also no installed
project management selection criteria and project manager selection process.
This results in the accidental appointment of Gary Anderson, senior scientist,
as a project manager of Blue Spider project.
g. Pc is not a project learning organization.

If PC was a project oriented

organization, it will adapt strengths of previous projects, learn from

weaknesses and mistakes, create suitable processes and innovate suitable ways
to tackle different projects. The Blue Spider Project started and implemented
as first project in a newly established organization based on assumptions on
trial and error. It didnt get the learning and experience advantage from the
previous projects of PC.
h. PC has project office but the office has no project management initiative as PC
takes several projects at a time and continuously. It needs active project office
with an orchestrated system.
2. In future, project managers should be people with proven skills in managing

successful projects. Hiring engineers without the requite knowledge in management

will compromise the effectiveness of the project and jeopardize the companys
reputation. The projects consist of people from different functional departments.
Oftentimes, projects and functional departments operate simultaneously. Officially,
personnel hold positions in their functional departments. It may be difficult for
projects to obtain commitment from members of the team who have department and
project responsibilities. Top management should ensure both groups are assigned
appropriate personnel and given proper support.
3. Parallel chains of commands diminish the authority of project managers and

compromise efficiency by having two centers of power. Conflicting instructions from

different heads will lead to confusion and institutional paralysis. To avoid this
situation, a clear chain of command should be established for all future projects The
roles and responsibilities of the team members should be properly and clearly
assigned.
23

4. In future, full management support should be given for the project to be successful.
5. Project Schedule/Plan (Trouble Shooting): Gary got so caught up in one task that he

always ended up losing time for the other tasks. He should have a proper fixed plan
with some slack time for each task. He should also assign people to different tasks
with expertise in the same instead of him taking care of it all in whole. The team
should ensure appropriate scheduling and adjustments to these schedules are
performed to ensure responsiveness and adaptability to unexpected changes.
6. Detailed plans outlining every stage of the project should be presented to the various

stakeholders so that they know their responsibilities beforehand.

7. Time frames indicating what actions need to be addressed will assist departmental

heads in allocating required resources to meet the stated requirements With regard to
project control; the project manager should retain full responsibility for all activities.
8. Poor communication and lack of consultative forums hamper the effectiveness of a

teams progress. On many occasions, Gary failed to keep his colleagues informed
about the projects performance and only approached them when faced with
challenges. Lack of adequate communication among various departments has been the
root cause for the over burden caused to Gary Anderson the program manager. There
has a communication breakdown both internally within the departments associated
with project and also with the client. Last minute updates about major functional
changes are the main cause for the breakdown of communications among various
departments. Being a project manager, Gary was the not informed about the new test
material, JXB-3 until he took an initiative to go to test lab. People from Production
and Engineering departments, all had one thing to say in common, which was Why
am I the last person to know about this change? The reluctance of client to accept the
alternate test matrix before the 180 day second milestone clearly shows the poor level
of communication the project management had with the client. New and unorthodox
changes are to be notified to various functional departments well in advance. The
R&D team, Production and Engineering departments should work in unison with the
common interest of project. It is strongly suggested to have formal internal meetings
prior to implementation of substantial changes rather than informing people about
what needs to be implemented by them after changes are made. As project manager,
24

Gary should be able to stay on top of all aspects of the project, whether it be admin
work or operations. It was right of him to delegate the tasks to different personnel in
order to ensure their preparation and completion. However, he should have reviewed
these personnels work and not overly focus only one aspect of the project.
9. A regular briefing session with all stakeholders would have ensured a steady flow of

ideas on how to optimize the use of available resources and manage existing
problems. A company code of conduct entailing acceptable behaviors of all staff will
eliminate incidences of unethical practices (Hamilton, 2004). The Blue Spider Project
was plagued with challenges arising from the assertion that the materials could
withstand temperatures of over 1550 F when in actual fact the threshold was only
1300 F.
10. Client Acceptance Lords Industries seemed to be reluctant in accepting the work by

Parks Corporation. The constant deviations from client requirements and concealing
of information regarding changes in implementation of requirements are the main
reason for this. As a former lead of R&D Gary emphasized more of working with Paul
Evans in designing new materials for testing, rather than taking care of managerial
responsibilities which is expected from his new designation
11. Client Consultation: The client was not kept in the loop at all about the ongoing of the

project. Only if they are, will they know if their needs are being met. Gary should
communicate the projects progress and their limitations so that clients can think about
whether to increase the budget, reduce the score of the project, provide more resources
or adjust the schedule. Even though constant communication with the client costs
more, it saves a lot of time and money in redoing tasks that are not approved by them.
Telling the truth at the start of the proposal itself may have led to an in depth review to
find an alternate solution.

25

6. REFERENCE

Gareis, R. and Huemann, M. 2000.Project management competences in the Project

oriented organisation. Gower Publishing, Hampshire.Graham, R.J.
Gareis, R.1989. Management by projects: the management approach for the future,
International Journal of Project Management, 7(4):2439.
Gareis, R.2000. Competences in the Project-oriented Organizational, Project
management Group.
Graham, R.J. and Englund, R.L. 2004. Creating environment for successful projects, 2nd
ed. USA: Jossey-Bass.

26