Project 2. Case study

1. What were the stakeholder management flaws in both cases?

2. What should have the project manager done better to engage the stakeholders?

3. According the stakeholder power matrix, categorise the stakeholders in a table form, starting from the most powerful to the least powerful. Repeat same for the ones with high interest to the lowest interest

4. How did the stakeholder management affect the scope of the project finally?

PROJECT 2: The construction of a two way railroad track through the town Centre: In the late 1980s, the Swedish government decided to transform the west coast railway (between Malmoe and Gothenburg) from a single to a double track railroad. The whole route passes through a number of communities, and one of these is the city of Lund. The initial stakeholder analysis of the project identified seven major stakeholder groups. The National Railroad Administration the developer of the project. The District Assembly, which was interested of how this development would affect the community as a whole, and in addition was responsible for the formal planning process. The railroad companies, which would be responsible for the traffic along the west coast railroad. The residents in the vicinity of the expanded railway, which were affected by the increase in railroad traffic. The National Government, which was both the initiator of the project, and the last instance of appeal for the formal planning process. The National Board of Housing and the Swedish Rescue Services were two of the national authorities to which the project was referred for consideration. The feasibility and conceptual design stage, 1990-1994 In 1990, the first investigations for the expansion of the west-coast railroad through the city of Lund, according to the requirements set out by the National Government. At this early stage the National Railroad Administration made the decision that the best alternative was to expand the railroad along the existing single-track route. However, this decision was made on the basis of insufficient analysis of other possible alternatives, and of how the proposed alternative affected the various stakeholders. The only stakeholders really being considered at this early stage were the railroad companies, which would manage the traffic on this railroad, and for them an expansion along the existing route was the most rational choice. The problem with this alternative was that it would affect a large number of residents along the railroad, who would experience a significant increase of railroad traffic in the vicinity of their homes. However, at this early stage they were not involved in the process. The first public consultations were held in November 1991, when a proposal. Essentially already decided on, was presented to the neighbouring residents. Due to the lack of public involvement an interest group consisting of concerned residents had been formed in 1990 to follow the process. At this early stage they had little or no influence on the process. In 1993, the District Assembly was involved because a community plan was required. By acting through the District Assembly the residents raised the question for the need of alternative solutions. As a base for the forthcoming local community plan, the District Assembly demanded additional investigations concerning alternative solutions from the project developer, the National Railroad Administration. An investigation of five alternatives was undertaken by an independent consultant, who showed that the proposed alternative was the best and most rational solution. One of the most compelling arguments for the expansion along the existing route was the developed infrastructure already in place with train stations, and that large areas of the city had been developed to coordinate with this existing infrastructure. The negative aspect was still that the proposed alternative would affect a large number of residents along the existing route. The formal planning stage 1994-1997 Based on the investigation undertaken the District Assembly decided to produce a local community plan based on the proposed alternative along the existing route. At this stage the District Assembly had sole influence on how the project would develop, and the project developer's role in this stage was to provide the information required by the District Assembly to make their decisions. However, at this stage the number of interested residents increased dramatically. This was probably due to the lack of information at the early stages and that it was first at this stage that the public became aware of the proposed development. The interest group of concerned residents increased their member base and also changed their perspective to actively oppose the proposed alternative and to put forward an alternative solution. This solution had been investigated as one of the five solutions and had been rejected because it necessitated a whole new infrastructure and because of its technical and economic disadvantages. These findings were questioned by the residents arguing that the alternatives had not been fairly investigated. In 1995, the District Assembly and the project managers decided to make an additional investigation to compare the alternative proposed by the project developer with that proposed by the residents. Again this investigation showed that it was more rational to expand along the existing route. However, at this stage of the project the relation between, on the one hand the project developer and the District Assembly, and on the other the residents along the existing route, deteriorated radically. The outcome of this was that every investigation made from this point on, which proposed the expansion along the existing route, was regarded as biased by the residents. In addition to this, two national authorities, the National Board of Housing and the Swedish Rescue Services had raised concerns about living conditions and safety issues along the proposed route. In spite of these concerns, the District Assembly approved the local community plan for the expansion along the existing route in the summer of 1997