• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
PMC2
 

PMC2

on

  • 928 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
928
Views on SlideShare
928
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    PMC2 PMC2 Document Transcript

    • Project Management National Conference 2011 PMI India Stakeholder Management Strategy: A Challenge in Indian Defence R&D Project – A Case Study SUBRATA DAS Scientist-E & Project Manager Gas Turbine Research Establishment2|P a g e Application of Select Tools of Psychology for Effective Project Management
    • Project Management National Conference 2011 PMI India Contents 1 Abstract..............................................................................................................................4 2 Introduction........................................................................................................................4 3 Project Stakeholders and Factors: A Literature Review....................................................5 4 Characteristics of Technology Development Projects.......................................................6 5 Case Study: Defence R&D project of fighter aircraft engine............................................7 6 Discussions.......................................................................................................................10 7 Conclusion........................................................................................................................11 8 Abbreviation.....................................................................................................................12 9 Acknowledgement............................................................................................................12 10 References:.....................................................................................................................12 11 Author’s Profile..............................................................................................................143|P a g e Application of Select Tools of Psychology for Effective Project Management
    • 1 AbstractEvery project, whether simple or complex, need to indentify its stakeholders.The selection of stakeholders, through its process of identifying the people ororganization to be impacted by the project and documenting relevant informationregarding their interests, involvement, expectations and impact on projectsuccess, necessitates utmost attention and exhaustive analysis. Thestakeholders may also influence the project deliverables, thus act as catalysts ofproject success. The levels of stakeholders within and outside the organizationare also important factors, to be considered during the preparation of projectfeasibility report and project scope. The necessity of evaluating stakeholderexpectations and its timely monitoring & review at an appropriate managementlevel determines the expected project outcome. It is always advisable anddesirable that project directors or managers effectively categorize thestakeholder group according to their interest, influence and involvement in theproject. In modern era, almost every project takes place in a context wherestakeholders’ contributions add value in the successful completion of the tasks.Often the project is sensitive to actions and decisions taken by the stakeholders.Project stakeholders can include project sponsors, contractors, user,competitors, media, insurance companies and third parties. Gas TurbineResearch Establish (GTRE), Bangalore under Defence Research andDevelopment Organisation (DRDO), while developing a gas turbine engine forIndian military application, provided due importance to its stakeholder.Considering the scenario of complex R&D project, the stakeholders at differentlevels were identified from project inception for different activities viz.Aerodynamic & mechanical analysis, simulation, technology acquisition,prototype build. Expectations of stakeholders from Indian Govt. (ProjectSponsor), user (IAF), certification authorities, other scientific & academicinstitutions, public & private sector industries were taken into account. In anutshell, this paper will bring out the methodologies of meeting stakeholder’sinterest, influence and involvement during planning and execution phases ofengine development.Key words: stakeholder, project phase, technology, success factor.2 IntroductionGas turbine engine development projects financed, controlled and reviewed bythe Government of India necessitates stakeholders’ assistance and supportduring project life cycle. The development cycle of an engine developmentproject typically follows Project Life Cycle (PLC) – initiation, growth, maturity anddecline.* Scientist “E’ & Project Manager (Kaveri), GTRE, Bangalore email:subratadas969@hotmail.com
    • Critical success factors for business or profit-oriented projects such asconstruction project, information technology projects and so on have receivedsignificant research interest by Pinto and Slevin (1987, 1989). However little ofthis research pays adequate attention to ‘technology development’ projectswhich are characterized by intangible development results, complex stakeholdermanagement and uncertainly. These factors, in each stage of project life cycle,contributing to the outcome of a technology based project need to be brought outexplicitly and discussed.3 Project Stakeholders and Factors: ALiterature ReviewThe project and its stakeholders can be viewed as a network in which the actorsinteract with each other and exchange information, resources and results(Milosevic, 1989). The user requirement and resources, vital inputs to a project,are more often controlled by the stakeholders. According to Jergeas et. al(2000), it is the stakeholder who ultimately determines whether a project is asuccess, based on the project results. Jan Terje Karlsen (2002) brought out thatclient, end users, contractors/suppliers, line organization, and public authoritiesare equal, when it comes to causing problems and uncertainly for project. Theproject environment is complex and changing (Gilbert, 1983). If stakeholdermanagement has not been managed properly, the project manager strive tomeet goals that were never intended by the stakeholders (Meredith and Mantel,2000). The frequent scope changes leading to time and cost overrun, poorcommunication, political & socio-economic situation are some of the additionalproblems and uncertainties caused by the stakeholders. To meet this challenge,several stakeholder management methods and guidelines have been introduced(Cleland, 1986, Gilbert, 1983 Jang, Chen and Klein, 2002 Savage et al., 1991).The guidelines include the execution of the management functions of planning,organizing motivating, directing and controlling the resources used to cope withstakeholders strategies.Diallo and Thuillier (2004) was the first important empirical research that isfocused on the specific success criteria and factor of development project.These authors assessed the project success as perceived by seven groups ofstakeholders; coordinators, task managers, supervisors, project team, SteeringCommittee, beneficiaries and population at large. They also outlined acomprehensive set of evaluation criteria that includes satisfaction of beneficiarieswith goods and services generated, conformation of the goods and servicesproduced to the project scope, achievement of project objectives, completion ofthe project in time and within budget, receiving a high national profile andrecovering good reputation among the principal donors.
    • 4 Characteristics of Technology Development Projects Technology development projects constitute a special type of project that enhances technical expertise and technological capability of an organization and the country with an objective to develop a system, useful to a group of target beneficiaries. These projects differ according to its scope, deliverables and beneficiaries. The objective of technology development projects, by definition, concern enhancement of technical knowledge & competency, capacity building and development of physical infrastructures. The scope of these projects encompasses the requirements of the users, so that the products developed at the matured stages of the project adhere to the specifications. The other salient objectives of the technology development projects are optimized utilization of national resources as a whole and complex web of many stakeholders’ involved (Youker, 1999). This category of projects is characterized by the knowledge and expertise of contemporary technologies of the competitors. The life-cycle analysis of these development projects revealed that the evaluation process and factors for these type of projects necessitate refinement and modification. A typical life cycle analysis for technology development projects are depicted in Table 1: TABLE 1: Typical Life Cycle Analysis for Technology Development Projects Life cycle phases Milestones of activities Stakeholders DeliverablesFeasibility • Analyze user requirements • Project sponsor • Feasibility report • Prepare product • Subject experts • Project proposal specification • User representatives • Evaluate the project • Project mangers of
    • alternatives similar categories of • Select the best alternative project • Identify stakeholders • Discuss with key stakeholders • Assess capability • Prepare product scope and • Different technical • Project WBS groups Implementation • Augmentation of existing • Budget & Resource Document (PID) physical capability Manager including • Enhance knowledge base • Risk Manager - Project scope • Evolve prototype building • Quality Manager - ProjectPlanning strategy schedule • Resource allocation - Project Cost • Quality management - Risk implementation Management plan - Quality plan - HR policies • Establish Project • Project sponsor • Project review management group • Project review meeting • Review project plan members • Modify scope • Control & review mechanism • Technology cost, schedule • Modify project scope, if acquisition group • PrototypeExecution applicable • Testing manager manufacturing • Prototype manufacturing & • Testing its qualification testing • Stakeholder requirement reassessment • Component/system • User representative • Assembly & assembly • Quality Manager integration • Prepare qualification • Project Management • Field trialProduct Integration & document group • Limited Seriestesting • Handing over prototypes for • Project sponsor Production (LSP) field trials • Project closure • Prepare project closure report 5 Case Study: Defence R&D project of fighter aircraft engine Gas Turbine Research Establishment (GTRE), Bangalore under Defence Research & Development Organisation (DRDO), is developing a gas turbine engine for application in Indian fighter aircrafts. This class of gas turbine engine consists of about 25,000 components, necessitating extensive project management knowledge and expertise in design, manufacturing, assembly, integration and testing of prototypes. The feasibility study phase of this project, as in Fig.1, identified the system requirement of military engine development. The process of evaluation and system analysis of engine development with respect to contemporary technology of similar class of engines generated initial awareness of an indigenous technology development programme. The support of all key stakeholders concerned was adequately raised to ensure the project proposal enters the next
    • planning phase and project execution with proper review & control mechanismlead to prototype manufacturing & its qualification testing. The resourceallocation and physical capability building, emphasizing material technology ofhigh temperature and high strength based titanium & nickel based alloys,manufacturing technology and engine prototype testing. Fig 1: System Analysis for Technology Development ProjectThe each and every process of the development cycle emphasizes theimportance of interaction with stakeholders. The design process of GTREencompasses different design integrations & its validation through simulation andtesting necessitating techno-managerial association of all technical groups, otherscientific organizations like National Aerospace Laboratory (NAL) and academicinstitutes like IISc and IITs. The association of these scientific experts fromindustry & academic fields enriched the design knowledge base of the country insystem development of fighter aircraft propulsion systems.The manufacturing cycle of aerospace materials is very much challenging, whichwarranted special process, techniques and should be embedded withmanufacturability, maintainability and reliability.The stakeholders association in manufacturing these nickel and titanium basedalloy materials culminated in probable consortium of about 15-20 manufacturingagencies. The manufacturing division of this engine programme associatedpremier public sector industries like HAL, Brahmos Aerospace (erstwhile Keltechindustries). The participation of material production and manufacturing privateindustries on risk-sharing basis facilitated the programme. The challenge oftechno-managerial decisions of Economic Order Quantity (EOQ) and cost of atechnology capability building with machines, “soft skills” of technical expertiseknowledge for machining were shared by these precision stakeholders. The
    • benefits accrued from this programme have also effect on socio-economic conditions of the country by contribution of employment and import substitution. The successful and precision manufacturing process leads to prototype assembly and integration, when risk mitigation and quality management philosophy followed in design and manufacturing process will be proven. The reliability and precision machining techniques and all associated stakeholders commitment & knowledge will be guaranteed by assembling more than 25000 components/sub-systems. The stakeholder’s management philosophy of prototype development process is depicted in Fig.2: Fig 2: Stakeholder Management Philosophy of Prototype Development Process The prototype engine & component testing associates the stakeholder from user (IAF), Certification Authority (CEMILAC), Project sponsor, industry experts along with project team of GTRE. The performance of prototype testing validates the task responsibility and accountability of all associated stakeholders. The laxity of the project team in assigning proper authority and delegation to its team members and stakeholders hinders the delivery schedule of final products. The criteria and factors chosen for Engine development project, other than traditional criteria of targets, time and costs are also included in all the life cycle phases of this type technology development projects, as brought out in Table 2, where issues like knowledge enhancement, physical capability building in-house and in stakeholder premises, were also considered. Table 2: Criteria and Factors for Engine Development ProjectProject Success Criteria Critical Success Factorphases
    • • Meeting user specification • Clear understanding of project • Addressing all stakeholders objectives & scope • Evaluating alternatives of available • In-house capability evaluation systems technology • Competence of designersFeasibility • Evaluating available resources to meet • Effective consultation with main user specification stakeholders i.e. IAF (user), CEMILAC • Stakeholders meeting (certification authority), DGAQA • Project team constitution (quality authority) • Project approval • Prepare WBS • Planning implementation document • Assign responsibility (PID) • Resource optimizations & distribution • Concurrence of primary/mainPlanning • Capacity utilization (in-house) stakeholder • Supplier/vendor meeting • Availability of resources • Project plan with scope, schedule, • Readiness of in-house facilities deliverable, risk & quality • Project planner experience • SOW preparation & contract • Commitment to project objectives and finalization plans • Allotment of resources • Continuous support of all stakeholders • Output produced vis-à-vis plan • Users (IAF) active participationExecution • Continuous review mechanism and • Resource mobilization controlling • Project team effectiveness • Change control process • Minimum changes in project plan & • Information to key stakeholders scope • Review of project scope • Timely delivery of all hardware • Project scheduling & its monitoringPrototype • Number of prototype assembly • Faster deviation analysis & itsassembly optimized acceptance decisionintegration & • Performance of components/systems • Implementation of quality managementtesting w.r.t. physical dimension & quality • Manufacturing deviation & its effect • project achievements & its future • Project deliverables vis-a-vis project • growth potential for advanced system scopeProject closure • project financial statement • Project cost and time overruns • key stakeholder appraisal • Interaction with project stakeholders • project extension 6 Discussions The technology development projects have a challenging task, the key factors being the understanding stakeholder management and their expectations with limitations of the project team or group. The stakeholders during the design & feasibility phase consist of technical experts from industry and academia, whereas the manufacturing facilities and technical expertise are utilized from private industries of India and foreign countries. During the prototype assembly, integration and testing the notable stakeholders are from user (IAF), aircraft industries, certification authority (CEMILAC) and quality authority (DGAQA). The development cycle of system and technology oriented project provide emphasis on the following aspects of stakeholder management: • Understand stakeholder needs
    • • Stakeholders assessment of the project• Association of multiple stakeholders with divergent interests and their respective company profiles• Quality and performance expectations from the stakeholders• Explaining project strategies• Resolve conflict and appreciation for positive inputs to the project• Resource mobilization through stakeholders• Encourage status reports submission as per schedule and its review mechanism• Address issues of stakeholders to avoid project cost/time overrun and timely delivery• Generating project ownership concept among key stakeholders.GTRE from the inception of the engine development project associated all keystakeholders and provided adequate exposure on project scope, schedule, cost,risk and quality management practices. The processes and philosophy followedalways keep stakeholders informed of achievements, its shortfalls with techno-managerial justification and resolution methodologies. All these facts and figuresare discussed during review meetings to gain their support and assistance. Theexpertise of key stakeholders is also utilized at the time of facility augmentationand the utilization of their facilities on time-sharing basis also provide leveragesin executing the project, resulting in saving resources and its optimal utilization.The knowledge and physical capability augmentation facilitates the productionschedules through proper ‘technology and knowledge’ transfer. It was alsobeneficial when the prototype, after successful assembly integration and testing,is inducted for Limited Services Production (LSP) or production line.7 ConclusionThis case study of defence R&D in the field of engine development projectnarrates the benefits and its success factors with criteria in association withstakeholders. The different phases of the project necessitated different levels ofstakeholder participation and involvement. The project manager during thefeasibility and planning phase of the project utilized the legacy data andauthenticated by application of risk factor. The interaction and discussion with
    • major stakeholders and the decisions emanating from review meetingsaccelerated the development cycle. The techno-managerial inputs from privateand public sector manufacturing and sub-system development agencies refinedthe design process and quality management system, resulting in risk mitigationof defect investigation and its repair of component & sub-systems at the stage ofassembly integration and prototype testing. The execution phase of these typesof project is characterized by field experience inputs from IAF (user) and aircraftdevelopment partner, who are pioneer in their relevant areas of expertise in thecountry. However, the technology development projects is in the category ofrisk-sensitive, as these are driven by aggressive, sometimes overly optimisticapproach of project team and its major stakeholders. The inexperience of projectplanner and executor also delays the project schedule, leading to cost overruns.The legacy data & information are not always beneficial and it is difficult to carryout statistical extrapolation of the facts. More often, these projects suffer fromimmature technology, ineffective acquisition strategy, unrealistic project deadlineand inadequate system engineering. The major or key stakeholders’ experienceshould be transformed into a credible program baseline with realistic scope,schedule & cost, maintaining quality of the deliverables to the satisfaction of theuser or customer. The area of training of manpower for skill enhancement andimparting knowledge are the requisites of successful stakeholder managementphilosophy for these types of projects.8 AbbreviationIAF: Indian Air ForceCEMILAC: Centre for Military Airworthiness & CertificationDGAQA: Director General Aeronautical Quality Assurance9 AcknowledgementThe author would like to thank the Director, GTRE for encouragement andproviding support in submission of this paper. The acknowledgement is alsoextended to Shri B. Shankara of GTRE for his excellent documentation support.10 References:[1] Khang Do Ba & Moe Tun Lin (2008), Success Criteria and Factors for International Development Projects: A Life-Cycle-Based Framework, Project Management Journal, Vol 39, No.1, 72-84.
    • [2] Rose Timothy M. & Manley Karen (2010), Financial Incentives and Advanced Construction Procurement Systems, Project Management Journal, Vol 41, No. 1, 40-50.[3] Meier Steven R (2010), Causal Inferences on the Cost Overruns and Schedule Delays of Large-Scale U.S. Federal Defence and Intelligence Acquisition Programs, Project Management Journal, Vol 41, No. 1, 28-39.[4] Cleland David I. “Project Stakeholder Management” Project Management Journal 17:4 (1986) Page No. 36-44.[5] Jergeas, George F., Erin Williamson, Gregory J. Skulmoski, and Janice Thomas, “Stakeholder Management on Construction Projects” AACE International Transaction (2000), Page No. P12.1-12.6.[6] Jiang James J., Edward Chen, and Gary Klein, “The Importance of Building a Foundation for User Involvement in Information System Projects,” Project Management Journal 33:1 (2002) Page No. 20-26.[7] Diallo.A.., & Thuillier, D. (2004). The success dimensions of international development projects. The perceptions of African project coordinators. International Journal of Project Management, 22, 19-31[8] Diallo.A.., & Thuillier, D. (2004). The success dimensions of international projects, trust, and communication: An African perspective. International Journal of Project Management, 23(3), 237-252.[9] Kwak, Y.H. (2002, September), Critical success factors in international development project management. Paper presented at the CIB 10th International Symposium Construction Innovation & Global competitiveness, Cincinnati, Ohio.[10] Litt, A.N.N., & Walker, A. (1998). Evaluation of projection outcomes. Construction Management & Economics, 16, 109-219.[11] Pinto J. K., & Slevin, D.P. (1987). Critical factors in successful project Implementation. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 34 (1), 22-27.[12] Pinto, J.K., & Slevin, D.P. (1989). Critical success factors in R&D projects. Research Technology Management, 32(1), 31-35.[13] Jan Terje Karlsen (2002) “Project Stakeholder Management”, Engineering Mangement Journal Vol 14 No. 4 Page No. 19-24.
    • [14] Cleland.D.I.,& King.W.R. (1983). Systems analysis and project management. New York: McGraw-Hill.[15] Conger,J.A., & Fuller, R.M. (2003). Developing your leadership pipelines. Harvard Business Review 81 (12), 77-84.11 Author’s ProfileMr Subrata Das obtained his bachelor’s degree in Mechanical Engg.Discipline from Calcutta University, India in the year 1989. Subsequently,he joined Gas Turbine Research Establishment in 1991. He wasassigned the responsibilities of carrying out component performanceTesting of Kaveri engine development programme. On successfulcompletion of this assignment, he pursued Master of BusinessAdministration (MBA) with specialization in Technology Management.After completion of MBA, he had been posted to ProgrammeManagement Office of Kaveri engine. He is mainly associated withproject management especially in component manufacturing, contractmanagement, budget and resource management. Shri Das is a qualifiedProject Management Professional (PMP) from Project ManagementInstitute (PMI), USA and also an Accredited Management Teacher (AMT)from All India Management Association, New Delhi. He is currently
    • pursuing his Doctoral Degree from Visveswaraya TechnologicalUniversity, Belgaum. He has to his credit 13 publications in variousInternational and National Journals and Conferences.subratadas969@hotmail.com / subrata@gtre.drdo.in