It is the start of January, and the Cascada Community Medical Center Prosthetics and Rehabilitation Expansion Project was finished in mid-November, due to the schedule compression steps that you initiated with the contractor. Now it is time to conduct a retrospective and gather input from the project stakeholders about what went well and what lessons could be applied for improvement on future projects.

To gather input from the community, you distributed a retrospective survey. The survey used a five point scale to assess the public's sentiments about the project. It also had a section for free form comments. The final results are just back for you to review.

Likert Results

Question	Percent Reporting 1 Strongly Disagree	Percent Reporting 2 Disagree	Percent Reporting 3 No Opinion	Percent Reporting 4 Agree	Percent Reporting 5 Strongly Agree
The cost of the project was managed effectively	20%	0%	20%	40%	20%
The completion date for the project met my expectations.	10%	30%	20%	30%	10%
The communications about the project were effective.	20%	30%	20%	20%	10%
It seemed that the project scope was well controlled.	25%	20%	25%	15%	15%
The quality of the project was monitored and given high priority.	10%	10%	20%	35%	25%

Survey Responses to Open Ended Question:

I was pleased that the project cost was capped at 2% over the original estimates.

The traveling public needed better awareness of which roads were going to be closed when. Notifications on the radio and television would have helped a lot.

It made me feel safer when I heard that the Entrance Way Bridge was going to be rebuilt due to structural issues that were uncovered.

I was concerned about my privacy and dat security until it was decided the Patient Portal was going to be rebuilt due to security issues with the API library.

I can't believe that the design process made it through approvals with the Entrance Way Bridge problemswhat a waste of money!

It seems like there were a lot of little additions to the project, like the additional greenery and signage to meet the local design style. All that seemed to add up.

The staff should have been informed of times the computer system would be down for upgrades or Patient Portal testing. Notifications on the clinic newsletter and email list-serve would have helped.

I feel like the parts of the project kept getting changed driving up the costs. An example is the additional monitoring line consoles and filter systems added to the 3D printer discharge system.

In addition, you held a retrospective meeting with project team, the town and state, and contractors. Your notes from the meeting are included below:

Positives

The team did an outstanding job of monitoring the budget and keeping it within the 2% maximum overrun.

It was great that we were able to pull the schedule in to complete before the holidays and still stay within our budget guidelines.

Despite some rough spots, we maintained a high commitment to quality.

Overall, I think the team worked well together.

Once we got past the "storming" phase of team development, I think we cooperated well together.

Needed Changes

People didn't always feel like they could communicate openly with one another. Look at the information leak of the status report to the media, as well as the whistleblower memo. If people have concerns or are upset about something, they should feel that they can speak their mind.

Maybe we should have been more stringent in our RFP documents. It seemed like we ran into some problems with the design-bid-build structure of the project"especially with the design problems on the Entrance Way Bridge and the the 3D printer discharge.

We tried to follow a strict change control process, but too often it just didn't happen. That caused some expansion in the project scope that maybe shouldn't have occurred.

It seemed like there were a lot of complaints from commuters and also local businesses in the newspaper about not knowing where construction was going to occur. It seems like we need to reexamine the way we provide information to the public.

Having the pre-bid conference for potential vendors was a good idea, but I think it could have been better organized. We need to ensure that all the vendors hear all the questions and answers, so they are working from a level playing field.

I think more specifics could have been added to the scope statement.

Make and Support Your Decision

Based on the input from different stakeholders, you believe the following project management processes need the greatest improvement:

Cost, procurement, and schedule

Scope, communications, and schedule

Quality, risk, and human resources

What to Submit Make a decision and explain why you took that decision