203% + A 9 WORK BREAKDOWN STRUCTURE AS A SKELETON FOR INTEGRATION Text Matt: I keep looking at this piece of paper and can't believe my eyes, or I must not understand YU H1* it. Style Layout More Percy: What paper are you looking at? The one I brought? Font Matt: Yes, let me check if I understand it well. The sheet of paper I am holding shows the work breakdown Calibri C Bold structure (WBS) for the timely termination of the Opto-Mechanical group's portion of work for Project Lada 14 pt B I U S (see Figure 1). Is that right? Character Styles None* Percy: Yes, right. Text Color These beginning moments of the conversation between Matt Boon, the engineering manager of the Opto- E E Mechanical Group, and Percy Bedge, project manager of Lada, do not promise much cooperation. Rather, the E atmosphere in which this conversation in Matt's office takes place smells of the open conflict and apparent > Spacing 1.0 - Single C tension between the meeting participants. > Bullets & Lists None Drop Cap A v Q Project WBS Unclosed Deliverables Unclosed Deliverables of Functional Group 1 of Functional Group n Unclosed Deliverables of Optoel. Group 1 LEVEL 1 LADA Project Lada Project Opto-Mechanical Design Work Breakdown StructureA 9 203% + Text Project YU H1* WBS Unclosed Deliverables Unclosed Deliverables Style Layout More of Functional Group 1 of Functional Group n Font Unclosed Deliverables of Optoel. Group 1 Calibri C Bold C 14 pt B I U S LEVEL 1 LADA Project Character Styles None* Opto-Mechanical Design Lada Project Work Breakdown Structure Text Color E E LEVEL 2 Opto-Mechanical Phase O Phase 2 Phase 1 Phase 3 Concept Amalynin Design Planming Launch Project Phases > Spacing 1.0 - Single C > Bullets & Lists None LEVEL 3 Inspection & Validate System Validato Validate Verify Mass Drop Cap Opto-Mechanical Acceptance of Shock Projection Lems System Optical Production Pilot Build Deliverables Tooled Parts Performance to Specification Performance Validate System Validate System Validato Mechanical Approval to Vibration Optical Engine Ship Product Assembly Performance Assembly BUSI 3633 - Project Execution, Monitoring, Control & ClosingI'D 203% v E Figure 1: Project 1._a_d_a WBS for the th9;_l\\/l__e_c_h_a_njc_a_l Group MICROMANAGEMENT? Matt: Well, on the second page, it shows an estimate ofthe person - hours and needed calendar time for each of my engineers involved in Project 1._ad_a_, from now until the end of it. Percy: Yes. That's the termination plan for Lada. What's wrong with it? Matt: I don't want to sound negative, but all of it is wrong - from details to philosophy. Percy: Give me details. Matt: Your 1._a_d_a_ planning indicates at what days on the calendar and how much you need each of my guys from th9;M__ec_ha_nj_:_a_l Group. That's based on the assumption that they are engaged in work on only one project, and that's your project, j._a_d_a_. Those are wrong details. As a matter of fact, they are shared among six projects. Since you scheduled them for certain time periods for which they are already scheduled _b_y other projects with higher priorities, those higher - priority projects automatically obtain my guys. Even if you planned properly, there is another issue for which I would not agree with your WBS and related termination plan. I thought we already resolved the ownership issue. You guys, the project management team, own deliverables from the top three levels of the project WBS. And we, the functional groups, own all deliverables in the lower levels the fourth and below. "We own them\" means we plan them, we execute them, and we control them, which means we monitor and report them to you. You have no right to meddle or control activities on our deliverables, unless we screw up. To remind you, I found the company's PM charter. It shows that this is the current and ruling division of ownership signed - off on by all engineering managers and project management, and senior management. But you seem to forget or ignore the PM charter, just as you tried to ignore it during j._a_t_:l_a'_s_ Map Day. With the termination WBS, it appears again that you would like to micromanage us. Percy: | see where you come from. Frankly, my intention was not to micromanage you. Give me a few days to go over it, and I'll get back to you. $1er Layout A v I Q .5 Character Styles Text Color 6 Spacing 1.0 7 Single Bullets & Lists None Drop Cap 203% + 9 obtain my guys. Even if you planned properly, there is another issue for which I would not agree with Text your WBS and related termination plan. I thought we already resolved the ownership issue. You guys, the project management team, own deliverables from the top three levels of the project WBS. And we, YU H1* the functional groups, own all deliverables in the lower levels - the fourth and below. "We own them" means we plan them, we execute them, and we control them, which means we monitor and report Style Layout More them to you. You have no right to meddle or control activities on our deliverables, unless we screw up. Font To remind you, I found the company's PM charter. It shows that this is the current and ruling division of Calibri C ownership signed - off on by all engineering managers and project management, and senior Bold C 14 pt management. But you seem to forget or ignore the PM charter, just as you tried to ignore it during B U S Lada's Map Day. With the termination WBS, it appears again that you would like to micromanage us. Character Styles None* Percy: I see where you come from. Frankly, my intention was not to micromanage you. Give me a few Text Color days to go over it, and I'll get back to you. E Discussion items 1. What are the pros and cons of having many levels of WBS? > Spacing 1.0 - Single C 2. Do you prefer a few or many levels of WBS? Why? > Bullets & Lists None 3. Explain how Percy can come back to justify his point by using Resources Breakdown structure for Drop Cap A v Matt to understand. 4. Is Matt's use of the Project Charter a strong point against Percy's point