THE AJAX PROJECT
Ruby Amey
Southwestern College of Professional Studies
Project Management Fundamentals
MGMT 505
Dr. Light
February 11, 2012
CEBEX CORPORATION
• CEBEX is a large Defense Corporation that has
many other projects that are being all done at the
same time. This corporation makes contracts for
projects with many successes that are well known
by the reputation of the corporation. The market
for this corporation has been fast moving and
growing steadily. With billions of dollars behind
the corporation, all projects are easily within
reaching their goals. CEBEX has annual sales in
excess $30 billion with over 120,000 employees
worldwide.
CEBEX CORPORATION
CONTINUED
• CEBEX has five business areas Aeronautics,
Electronic Systems, Information and
Technology Services, Integrated Systems and
Solutions, and Space Systems. AJAX is one of
the new projects sponsored by the Integrated
Systems and Solutions Division in the
Homeland Security Business.
PROBLEMS TRAN FACES
TECHNOLOGY
PROBLEMS
GENERATION AND
CULTURAL PROBLEMS
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Audio
Optical
Tactical
Laser Subsystems
Cultural Differences
Generation Gaps
Salary Problems
Language and
Communication
METHOD OF SOLVING TRAN’S
PROBLEMS
•
•
•
•
Spending More Money on the Project
Spending Money on a Retreat
Motivating the Team Members
Defusing problems by Answering their
Concerns
COST ASSOCIATED WITH
THE PROJECT
•
•
•
•
•
Paying for the Retreat
Paying for the Facilitator
Paying for the Project
Paying for the Salaries of Experts
Overall Budget Costs
RISK ASSESSMENT FOR PROJECT
Risk Event
Likelihood
Impact
Detection
Difficulty
When
Conducting the
two day retreat
4
5
1
Beginning of the project
Conducting all
5
phases of testing
4
5
Discovery of fault or
success at the time of
each test
Not knowing
how the
technology will
respond until
after installation
5
5
5
The difference of theory
and practical application
of theory
Cohesion of the
team
3
5
2
Discovered at the
beginning of the project
Project Risk Assessment
(Amey, 2012)
RETURN ON INVESTMENTS
Return on Investment
“The quotient of original budget and actual cost was used to calculate the cost index (CI).
Project performance indexes were used to assess the cost and schedule performances on the
project considered to be representative of the company being benchmarked. The CI and schedule
(1)
index (SI) are defined in Equations 1 and 2. Cost Index, CI =
Schedule Index, SI =
(2)” (Kwak, 2000, p. 5).
CONCLUSION
•
Tran did an effective job managing the project. He was
initially faced with problems with his personnel refusing to work
together because of cultural and age differences. He dealt with the
issue by sending his group on a two day retreat. His efforts included
hiring a facilitator to have exercises designed to create a cohesive
team. The retreat was a success.
•
The project progressed in five stages after installation. When
installation was complete, the five tests were executed to
determine the effectiveness of the installation, hardware and
software of CEBEX. Tran encountered problems with the project
during the second round of testing. Because of the nature of the
work, his team became discouraged again. Tran effectively
motivated his team by working with each group to boost their
motivation levels. Finally, the project is on track with the third
round of testing a success.
Reference
•
Anderson, J., ., & Narasimhan, R. (1979). ASSESSING PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
RISK: A METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH. Management Science, 25(6), 512-521.
•
Charvat, J. (2003). Re-engineering IT Projects: Knowing When to Stop. Cost
Engineering, 45(3), 10.
•
Hamilton, T. M. (1968). Clarifying Responsibility Relationships. California
Management Review, 10(3), 41-52.
•
•
Larson, E.W., & Gray, C.F. (2011). Project management the managerial
process, fifth edition. Columbus, OH: McGraw-Hill
•
Liu, L., & Zhu, K. (2007). Improving Cost Estimates of Construction Projects Using
Phased Cost Factors. Journal Of Construction Engineering & Management, 133(1),
91-95. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2007)133:1(91).
•
Kwak, Y. H. (2000). Calculating Project Management's Return on Investment.
Project Management Journal, 31(2), 38.