Skip to main content

The Stakeholders before PEO role came into existence

-

The stakeholders for the LAMP H projects were the project manager, then he appointed the Independent system analysis organization to perform requirement analysis for the project, they were critical stakeholders too. Army Material Command controlled the funds required for the project, so they were stakeholders too. Troop-Support Command, DOD and Department of Army Staff were stakeholders too. The R&D center and the Transportation School or T school were stakeholders too.

Since DOD is associated with the United States Government, hence the government would be a stakeholder too. Since this amphibian vehicle was planned to be used in battlefields by all troops, Navy and Air Force were stakeholders too.

Stakeholders’ influence including at least potential for threat, the potential for cooperation and strategy adopted.

Initially before the PEO role came into existence the project manager did an excellent job by getting requirement analysis done. The project manager got the consensus after requirement analysis was done, Starting from the Department of Army to DOD staff. The Project manager had to showcase the importance of the project to the Department of Army so that Army Material Command would fund the project.

The R & D center did the initial research, later turned out there were issues in their calculations. The Transportation School was enthusiastic about the project too.

The project manager had to prove that the project was feasible, so he got the requirement analysis done and then the R&D department proved that it was possible. As T School became enthusiastic, the project manager got approval for funds required for the project from Army Material Command. The most influential stakeholder was the Army Material Command. The DOD staff did not really play any critical role. But the Army and DOD of course were stakeholders.  The R&D team and T School were the teams who did a feasibility study and was going to support it, they were influential stakeholders too. The project manager needed their cooperation for the success of the project.

This the strategy worked out because the DOD, Department of Army and Army Material Commands were fine with the project, the benefits, and the potential of success. As the most important stakeholder was ready to go ahead, the T school was ready to support the project too, as we noticed less enthusiastically since they found out the R&D team made some mistakes in calculations.         Troop support command was okay since Army material Command already funded the project. The project manager took up a great strategy by engaging the Requirement analysis organization to get the ball rolling.

 

Describe the changes in the stakeholders' map as well as in the influence analysis after the implementation of the Program Executive Officer.

The PEO had control over funding and the new project manager replaced the existing project manager, and that PM became deputy manager. This is what the Department of Army envisions while changing the structure (Kerzner, 2003). The new project manager or Deputy Manager did not understand that or did not handle the communication well that T school had to prove the required operational capabilities document within a defined timeline. ROC, which was indispensable(Metzger,2003) was needed to be approved before funds could be used for R&D. T School did not do a good job getting this done, the R&D department did not follow up on this, and project managers did not track this. PEO being in charge of funding now did not fund the R&D.

 

So the PEO, Watercraft PM, R&D center, T School are direct stakeholders while Army, Army Material Command, Army Troop Support Command were stakeholders too. But they were not really involved. The PEO was not very supportive and the new The project manager did not do well-managing stakeholders, neither did the deputy do any good.

 

 

 

 

References –

Kerzner, H. (2003). Project management: A systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Metzger, J. (2003). JWAES: A case study. Project Management Journal, 34(4), 40–46. (Note: The Required Operational Capability (ROC) document is now known as an Operational Requirements Document [ORD]).


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Question and Answer

      * These attacks consist of injecting malicious client-side scripts into a website and using the website as a propagation method is: These attacks consist of injecting malicious client-side scripts into a website and using the website as a propagation method is: XML External Entities Cross Site Scripting (XSS) Security Mis Configuration Injection * A security principle, that ensures that authority is not circumvented in subsequent requests of an object by a subject, by checking for authorization (rights and privileges) upon every request for the object is ____.   A security principle, that ensures that authority is not circumvented in subsequent requests of an object by a subject, by checking for authorization (rights a Complete Mediation Least Privileges Separation of Duties Weakest Link * ...
Post a Comment
Read more

What is Hill's framework for Operations Strategy ?

            Nokia was once the leader in the mobile industry, but that did not continue. In 2013 Nokia’s CEO Stephen Elop made a memorandum named on media with the “Burning Platform.” In this essay, we are going to identify which elements relate to operation management definition. Then, what step of the five steps within Hill’s framework do we recognize? Also, what internal and external factors do we observe. Finally, our comments on the use of violent imagery and language. Which elements related to James’ Operations Management definition do you identify within the “Burning Platform” memorandum?             Transformation. The CEO is trying to convince the employees of transforming Nokia by joining Microsoft. It is a transformation of information kind and the type of facilities transformation.            The third step of assessing how different product win orders against competitors is t...
Post a Comment
Read more

How Toyota New Global Architecture (TNGA) revolutionize the automobile manufacturing industry?

Toyota New Global Architecture (TNGA) system was created to revolutionize the actual automobile manufacturing systems. TNGA aims to promote a massive transformation in Toyota's development processes by emphasizing in harmony between planning and design, which, when appropriately combined and managed, will increase the company’s efficiency (N.A., 2015). Toyota's TNGA system is revolutionary because it creates an even leaner way of designing and manufacturing its cars and establishes a new era of vehicle design and production. From a different perspective, TNGA is a revolutionary system not because it employs a modular approach; since companies like Nissan and Volkswagen already use modular systems in their production plants (Schmitt, 2015). It is revolutionary because it is disruptive and expands the traditional and legendary Toyota’s lean methodology to a different level (N.A., 2015). This new global architecture system is disruptive to the old Toyota Production System (T...
1 comment
Read more