One task force member came to Karin to complain that the contractor dealing with billing would not listen to his concerns about problems

that could occur in the Virginia division when billings were consolidated. The contractor had told him, the task force member, he had

bigger problems than consolidation of billing in the Virginia division. Karin replied, "You can settle the problem with the contractor. Go to

him and explain how serious your problem is and that it will have to be settled before the project is completed."

Later in the week in the lunchroom she overheard one consulting contractor bad$-$mouthing the work of another$-$"never on time, interface

coding not tested." In the hallway the same day an Accounting Department supervisor told her that tests showed the new software will

never be compatible with the Georgia division's accounting practices.

While concerned, Karin considered these problems typical of the kind she had encountered on other, smaller software projects.

FOUR MONTHS LATER

The project seemed to be falling apart. What had happened to the positive attitude fostered at the team$-$building workshop? One contractor

wrote a formal letter complaining that another contractor was sitting on a coding decision that was delaying their work. $"$We cannot be held

responsible or liable for delays caused by others." The project was already two months behind, so problems were becoming very serious.

Karin finally decided to call a meeting of all parties to the project and partnering agreement.

She began by asking for problems people were encountering while working on the project. Although participants were reluctant to be first

for fear of being perceived as a complainer, it was not long before accusations and tempers flared out of control. It was always some group

complaining about another group. Several participants complained that others were sitting on decisions that resulted in their work being

held up$.$ One consultant said, $"$It is impossible to tell who's in charge of what." Another participant complained that although the group

met separately on small problems, it never met as a total group to assess new risk situations that developed.

Karin felt the meeting had degenerated into an unrecoverable situation. Commitment to the project and partnering appeared to be waning.

She quickly decided to stop the meeting and cool things down. She spoke to the project stakeholders: $"$It is clear that we have some serious

problems and the project is in jeopardy. The project must get back on track, and the backbiting must stop. I want each of us to come to a

meeting Friday morning with concrete suggestions of what it will take to get the project back on track and specific actions of how we can

make it happen. We need to recognize our mutual interdependence and bring our relationships with each other back to a win$/$win

environment. When we do get things back on track, we need to figure out how to stay on track."

Why does this attempt at project partnering appear to be failing?

If you were Karin, what would you do to get this project back on track?

What action would you take to keep the project on track?