Project Management The Managerial Process McGraw Hill CASE STUDY GROUP ASSIGNMENT OPTION 1- DUE WEEK 6 SESSION 1 FRANKLIN EQUIPMENT LTD (FEL) HRM 4016 This is a team project that is a combined written report and a presentation of your findings. There may be four to six people assigned to a team as directed by the professor Students will be assigned to a group either in class or online prior to the end of week 3. Read the case study thoroughly to obtain an understanding of FRANKLIN EQUIPMENT LTD (FEL) and the current business situation. As you go through the case study, identify issues and aspects of the situation that will help you to analyze the case and write thorough responses to the questions outlined below. You must use HR concepts and do secondary research in order to support your responses. Please follow APA standards for works cited. Students are reminded that references must be cited for all sources of information. Use Times New Roman and use 11-point font. Each team will submit a ten-twenty page paper responding to the questions that are outlined on the case study. This will include the cover page, and works cited, PPTS (condensed to fit on 8.5 x 11 inch pages), meeting minutes, peer evaluations and a team contract. Include handouts in this report as appendices, as well. Students are to rewrite the questions and the related responses. Teams are expected to respond to the questions using the HR concepts used in the course and using secondary research both from the text and other sources. Your cover page for the report must include the respective names and student numbers of all team members, professor name and course number. You will submit the completed report including the first two meeting templates, references, and team contract and peer evaluations, PPTS in class by the deadline outlined to you by the professor. You are expected to individually and privately evaluate each of your team members on their contribution to the team project. Include a peer review for each member of the team including self. Each member of the team must complete peer evaluations individually. One person will need to compile the peer evaluations and include as attachments and hand in during class. Be honest in your evaluations please. Use the template that has been assigned for this purpose. A minimum 8 - maximum 10-minute presentation is required from each group. Do not use internet based connection ie. Hotmail or Prezi. You must provide the class with the context of the case prior to presenting your findings and solutions. Students are encouraged to be creative with your presentations. Everyone in the team must participate. Do NOT read your report to the class. You must try to engage the class in your discussion. Presentations require a power point presentation capturing important information. You may consider handouts as well. PPTS must be included in your report. Keep in mind you are making a business presentation therefore business casual is required. Presentations are to be ready the same day. Presenters will be drawn at random for delivery. All students must be ready to deliver their presentation or will be assigned a penalty for delay. . The written report of the assignment is due in Week 6 Session 1 is due in class and the presentation is due on the same day in class. The assignment is valued at a total of 20% of your final mark for this course. 1 Project Management The Managerial Process McGraw Hill Late reports and presentations will be penalized 20% per day when students cause lateness. Plagiarism is a serious academic misconduct that can result in failure of the course. Assignments are not accepted via email. CASE STUDY-FRANKLIN LTD. Franklin Equipment, LTD (FEL) with headquarters and main fabrication facilities in Saint John, New Brunswick, was founded 100 years ago to fabricate customer designed large machines for construction businesses in the Maritime Provinces Over the years its product lines became strategically focused on creating rock-crushing equipment for dam and highway construction and for a few other markets that require the processing of aggregate. FEL now designs, fabricates and assembles stationary and portable rock-crushing plants and services its own products and those of its competitors. In the 1970s FEL began to expand its market from the Maritime Provinces to the rest of Canada. FEL currently has several offices and fabrication facilities throughout the country. More recently FEL has made a concerted effort to market its products internationally. Last month, FEL signed a contract to design and fabricate a rock-crushing plant for a Middle East construction project, called Project Abu Dhabi. Charles Gatenby secured this contract and has been assigned as a project manger. This project is viewed as a coup because FEL has wanted to open up markets in this area for a long time and has had difficulty getting prospective customers to realize that FEL is a Canadian firm and not from the United States. Somehow these customers view all North American vendors as the same and are reluctant to employ any of them because of international political considerations. A project of this scope typically starts with the selection of a team of managers responsible for various aspects of the design, fabrication, delivery and installation of the product. Manager selection is important because the produce design and fabrication vary with the unique needs of each customer. For example, the terrain, rock characteristics, weather conditions, and logistical concerns create special problems for all phases of plant design and operations. In addition, environmental concerns and labor conditions vary from customer to customer and from region to region. In addition to the project manager, all projects include a design engineer, an operations manager, who oversees fabrication and on-site assembly; and a cost accountant, who oversees all project financial and cost reporting matters. Each of these people must work closely together if a wellrunning plant is to be delivered on time and within costs constraints. Because international contracts often require FEL to employ host nationals for plant assembly and to train them for operations, a human resource manager is also assigned to the project team. In such cases, the human resource manager needs to understand the particulars of the plant specifications and then use this knowledge to design selection procedures and assess particular training needs. The human resource manager also needs to learn the relevant labor laws of the customer's country. FEL assigns managers to project teams based on their expertise and their availability to work on a particular project given their other commitments. This typically means that managers without heavy current project commitments will be assigned to new projects. For instance, a manager finishing one project will likely be assigned a management position on a new project team. The project manager typically has little to say about who is assigned to his or her team. 2 Project Management The Managerial Process McGraw Hill Because he secured Project Abu Dhabi and has established positive working relationship with the Abu Dhabi customer, Gatenby was assigned to be project manager. Project Abu Dhabi are Bill Rankins, a brilliant design engineer, Rob Perry, operations manager with responsibility for fabrication and installation, Elaine Bruder, finance and cost accounting manager and Sam Stonebreaker, human resource manager. Each of these managers has worked together on numerous past projects. A few years ago, FEL began contracting for team facilitator services from several consulting firms to help new project teams operate effectively. Last month, FEL recruited Carl Jobe from one of these consulting firms to be a full time internal consultant. A number of managers, including Gatenby, were so impressed with Jobe's skills that they convinced FEL top management of the need to hire a permanent internal facilitator; Jobe was the obvious choice. Because Gatenby was instrumental in hiring Jobe at FEL, he was excited at the prospect of using Jobe to facilitate team building among Project Abu Dhabi team members. Gatenby was very proud of having secured this project and had expected to be appointed project manager. He knew that this project's success would be instrumental in advancing his own career. Gatenby told Jobe. \"This project is really important to FEL and to me personally. I really need for you to help us develop into a team that works well together to achieve the project's goals within budget. I've observed your success in developing teams on other projects and I expect you will do the same for Project Abu Dhabi. I'll take care of you if you help me make this work\". Jobe outlined for Gatenby how he would proceed. Jobe would begin by interviewing team members individually to learn their perceptions of each other and of the promises and pitfalls of being involved in this project. Meetings of the entire team would follow these interviews using the information he collected to help establish a team identity and a shared vision. Jobe interviewed Bruder first. She expressed skepticism about whether the project could succeed. During the interview, Bruder appeared to be distant and Jobe could not figure out why he had not established good rapport with her. Bruder intimated that she expected a lot of cost overruns and a lot of missed production deadlines. But not knowing Jobe well, Bruder was reluctant to identify any specific barriers to the project's success. While she would not directly say so it was clear to Joe that Bruder did not want to be a part of Project Abu Dhabi. Jobe left this interview confused and wondering what was going on. Jobe's next interview was with Perry, the operations manager. Perry has worked at FEL for 15 years and he immediately came to the point: \"This project is not going to work. I cannot understand why upper management keeps assigning me to work on projects with Rankins. We simply cannot work together and we don't get along. I have disliked him from day one. He keeps dropping the fact that he's has earned all these advanced degrees from Purdue. And he keeps telling us how things are done there. I know he's better educated than I am and he is really smart. But I am smart too and am good at what I do. There is no need for Rankins to make me feel like an idiot because I don't have a degree. Jobe, I'll be honest with you. Rankins has only been here for five years, but I hold him personally responsible for my problem with alcohol and for its resulting effect on my marriage. I got divorced last year and its Rankin's fault.\" Jobe next talked with Rankins, who said, \" I don't care what you do. Perry and I simply can't work closely together for the nine months it will take to get it done. One of us will kill the other. Ever since I arrived at FEL, Perry has hated my guts and does everything he can to sabotage my designs. We usually worry about customers creating change orders; here it's the fabrication and operations manager who is responsible for them. Perry second-guesses everything I do and makes 3 Project Management The Managerial Process McGraw Hill design changes on his own, and these are always bad decisions. He is out of control; I swear he stays awake at night thinking up ways to ruin my designs. I don't have this problem with any other manager.\" Jobe left these interviews thoroughly discouraged and could not imagine what would come up in his interview with Stonebreaker. But Stonebreaker was quite positive: \"I enjoy these international projects where I get to travel abroad and learn about different cultures. I can't wait to get started on this.\" Jobe asked Stonebreaker about the ability of various team members to work together. Stonebreaker replied. \"No problem\" We've worked together before and have had no problems. Sure, there have been ruffled feathers and hurt feelings between Rankins and Perry. Rankins can be arrogant and Perry stubborn, but its never been anything that we can't work around. Besides, both of them are good at what they do and are professionals. They'll keep their heads on straight.\" Jobe was even more bewildered. Gatenby says this project's success rides on Jobe's facilitation skills. The finance manager appears to want off this project team. The design engineer and operations manager admit they detest each other and cannot work together. And the human resources manager, having worked on projects with Perry and Rankins before, expects a rosy working relationship and anticipates no problems. Jobe had a second meeting with Gatenby. Before discussing the design of the team-building sessions, he asked questions to learn what Gatenby thought about the ability of team members to work together. Gatenby admitted that there has been very bad blood between Perry and Rankins, but added, \" That's why he hired you. It's your job to make sure that the history between those two doesn't interfere with Project Abu Dhabi's success. It's your job to get them to work well together. Get it done.\" Their dialogue toward the end of this meeting progressed as follows: Jobe: \"Why do you expect Rankins and Perry to work well together, given their history? What incentives do they have to do so? Gatenby: \"As you should know, FEL requires formal goal setting between project managers and functional managers at the beginning of each project. I've already done this with Bruder, Stonebreaker, Perry, and Rankins. Perry and Rankins have explicit goals stating they must work well together and cooperate with each other.\" Jobe: What happens if they do not meet their goals?\" Gatenby: \"I've already discussed this with top management. If it appears to me after two months that things are not working out between Perry and Rankins, FEL will fire Rankins.\" Jobe: \"Does Perry know this?\" Gatenby: \"Yes\". 4 Project Management The Managerial Process McGraw Hill Discussion Questions 1. Evaluate the criteria FEL uses to assign managers to project teams. What efficiencies do these criteria create? What are the resulting problems? 2. Why is it even more important that project team members work well together on international projects such as Project Abu Dhabi? 3. Discuss the dilemma that Jobe now faces. 4. What should Jobe recommend to Gatenby, and substantiate your response using HR and OB concepts that you have learned from the text and class that are detailed and appropriate to the issues. 5 Running head: FRANKLIN EQUIPMENT LIMITED Franklin Equipment Ltd University Name Tutor Title City and State Date 1 Running head: FRANKLIN EQUIPMENT LIMITED 2 Franklin Equipment Ltd Introduction According to Derntl & Motschnig-Pitrik (2004)Peer Evaluations and team contracts are the ones whoch determines if the viable project will work effectively. This is because they analyses the ability of each manager and determines the strengths of the managers to determine if the project might collapse of work effectively. This paper tries to evaluate the peer and the team contracts in Franklin Equipment Ltd and determine whether the appointed managers will result in the success of Abu Dhabi project; Contingency approach criterion Franklin Equipment Ltd. Uses contingency approach criteria to assign managers to project teams. Mller & Turner (2007) observes that, Contingency approach is a criteria used to assign various managers to a certain project so as to work collectively for the success of the project. The criteria bases on the competency of the manager and the requirements of the project to determine which manager is best situated for which project. This criterion ensures that those highly qualified managers who are well experienced with the required expertise are selected for a certain project in ensuring that they perform the best services to its clients and displaying enough satisfaction to the top management of the work effectively and efficiently done. Contingency approach also applies in the projects that require a single manager to be in a position to perform more than one task by quickly finishing one and then joining the other task that he/she will be assigned next (Mller & Turner, 2010). This criterion, therefore, measure the mangers ability of to work in multi-projects that requires switching from one task to another after completing the first one (Larson & Gray, 2011). Running head: FRANKLIN EQUIPMENT LIMITED 3 Franklin Equipment Ltd. uses the multi-project criterion for assessing the ability of managers to switch from one task assigned to another. The company has employed five managers as the project team for the international contract that they have been awarded in the Middle-east. The top management therefore has highlighted that some managers will be engaged in multi-project where they will be transferred to other sections to continue working for the same project after completing the first task assigned to them. The company has assigned various positions to five managers that will form the project team and ensure the success of the project as it is the first project they are doing internationally thus they have to perform their best. Efficiencies of the contingency approach The contingency approach criterion has several efficiencies that it has brought to the Franklin equipment Ltd. First, Larson & Gray (2011) States that, the criterion has helped it to select the best managers with the required skills, expertise and who have enough experience to perform their tasks effectively. This is because; the criterion assesses the competency of the manager in terms of his/her speed in doing the task and also doing more than one task. Secondly, the criterion enables the top management to select a group of managers who are able to match their skills with the task they are given as they are specialized in that section thus ensuring that a quality work is provided by each manager assigned. Thirdly, the criteria evaluate each manager in terms of his ability to match the project requirements with his expertise and skills. The managers are able to display high skills as they are selected according to their much experience in the work and the effectiveness of their performance. These managers are potential regarded as the best and are expected to provide quality work. Lastly, the criterion is designed to provide quality services as the tasks are shared and the many managers brings together there competent ideas ensuring that work is done in the most effective way and within the stipulated time. Running head: FRANKLIN EQUIPMENT LIMITED 4 Problems of contingency approach However, the project criterion used (contingency approach) results in poor working among the managers. This is because; it bases on competency and matching with the project requirements but does not consider other important aspects such as good relations among the chosen managers. This results in the choices of the managers randomly to work together without considering some aspects such as, the relationship between the various project managers. This might result in lack of cooperation and might sometimes end up resulting in fights within the organization thus reducing the efficiency with which the work is expected to be performed by the chosen managers. According to Kumar, Maheshwari & Kumar (2003), the results might be catastrophic in a such a way that uncooperative and stubborn working together as one project team might results in the collapse of the project along the way as there is no that good relationship and cooperation the workers as required. Therefore, the fact that Franklin equipment Ltd uses this contingency approach criterion has resulted in the appointment of some managers to work together who are not in good terms like Perry and Rankling thus showing the possibilities of the international project not working as required and expected. Therefore, it will automatically face these problems along the way. It is very important for project team managers to work together in international contracts. This will help any company to complete its work effectively and efficiently as planned and also ensures that the task is performed well by each manager playing his/her role without any qualms and thus a high quality work is likely to be given (Ang & Slaughter, 2001). Another thing is that, the managers should work together so as to ensure that they do a good job internationally that will enable to it market itself in the international markets and thus having to improve on its markets. They have to show the unity in the work so as to make work easier and simple for Running head: FRANKLIN EQUIPMENT LIMITED 5 everyone so as not to make the project collapse. Working collaboratively together enables the cohesion and friendship at the work, thus, being able to solve any problems faster as each manager has the ability and willingness to help each other in ensuring that a quality service is provided internationally. This is the first time Franklin Equipment Ltd is establishing a contract internationally and in the Middle-East, a region which it has been yearning for some time. Therefore, the managers' needs to work collaboratively together so as to provide quality work that will ensure that the project works out as expected and planned earlier. International projects such as the Abu Dhabi needs to be well performed without disappointments as it is mostly associated with higher profits and employment opportunities. The managers therefore needs to work collaboratively so as to provide assistance to each other in the event of reducing the tasks and making work easier for every manager thus doing the expected job within the stipulated time. Ang & Slaughter (2001) says that, those managers who perform their work with qualms interferes with the smooth functioning of the work as each manager ends up not displaying his/her best in the work. Also the managers who have personal differences might do their jobs in a bad manner so as to spoil the sector of the next manager in the event that the managers does poor quality work thus resulting in the dismissal or being sucked. This therefore results in a situation that is difficult to handle by the top management as each manager who was selected is competent enough to bring the required expertise skills and experience in ensuring that the project functions more effectively and efficiently. Jobe's Dilemma Jobe is faced with a very big dilemma that where has to make a rational and informed decision towards providing the required solution to the critical situation. This is because there Running head: FRANKLIN EQUIPMENT LIMITED 6 are five managers who have been assigned to be the project team for Abu Dhabi in the MiddleEast. The consultant, Jobe needs to provide a solution to the available solution in the project. There are personal differences among these managers and they cannot be easily fired or dismissed mainly because each manager is highly competent and is able to perform his work well towards the success of the contract as long as he/she is working in a situation that most effectively results in his/her high quality work. Rankin and Perry have personal differences and they always do not get along well into the work. Rankling is a design engineer while Perry is an operational engineer. The operational engineer always makes the design decisions on his/her own and this is wrong as the design has to come from an expert. And because Rankin is the only expert in that field, the work will not be done effectively thus a clear solution will not be found and the work will not be performed smoothly thus resulting in poor quality work. Another thing is that the Bruder, finance and cost accounting manager does not want to be part of the Abu Dhabi project, he suggest that the work might results in overconsumption and thus might collapse along the way. Stonebreaker, the human resource manager is the only one who gave Jobe hope that the project will work out effectively all the managers have worked together previously through several projects which have turned out to be successful even in the event that there were some personal differences among this managers. The project manager wants Jobe to do all this best and use all means in ensuring that he comes up with a way to convince the other managers who are in conflict in ensuring that they work collaboratively together in ensuring that the project succeeds. This is because the project manager, Gatenby says that the project is both important to him and the organization as if it will succeed, it will result greater advantages on his side. the dilemma comes in whereby, he understands that there is high possibilities of the project not working effectively as Perry and Rankin cannot work together as Running head: FRANKLIN EQUIPMENT LIMITED 7 Perry might do poor work intentionally or insist on qualms that will result in the dismissal of Rankin which is not fair. On the other hand, he has pressure from Gatenby to try all means to ensure that the project continues and works out effectively by solving the differences between Perry and Rankin and encouraging Buder to develop a positive attitude towards the project. Jobe knows that it is difficult to solve this differences and this is where the dilemma comes in as he does not know which action to take in this case. Recommendations Basing on various human relation concepts and the organizational behavior concepts from our course, I came up with the following recommendations of what Jobe should tell Gatenby to come out of this dilemma effectively; First, Jobe should make Gatenby understand that poor relations among people working together always results in poor performance. Perry and Rankins do of get along well and if working together one of them might kill the other or might cause the firing of the other. Therefore, once the two are working together, then the Abu Dhabi project will definitely go astray. Secondly, Jobe should inform Gatenby that poor workers morale also leads in poor performance. Bruder has shown that he is not interested in the project ad that whatever should be done or improved will not save the situation. Therefore, three managers out of the five who were appointed by the top management are against the project. Therefore, this forms the simple majority and should Gatenby insist, the three managers might do the work in the wrong way intentionally so as to ensure that it collapses. Therefore, Jobe should tell Gatenyby either to appeal for other new managers who are not against the project and who potrays and high potential and morale of continuing with the project like stonebreaker. This might result in the Running head: FRANKLIN EQUIPMENT LIMITED 8 success of the project as requested by Gatenby. However, if finding other managers will be a problem then he should right a proposal to the management seeking for the termination of the project and forfeited the advantages that could have accrued to him. This is because, there is nothing he can do to change the behavior of Perry, rankin and Bruder as they already have a negative perception on the project due to their personal reasons and not that of the organization. Peer evaluation and team contract From the analysis and review of the five managers that were chosen by the top management for the Abu Dhabi international project, majority of the managers have low esteem, morale and have personal difference with each other thus cannot work together. The operation manager, perry and the Design engineer do not get along well for the past five years and might result in fights during work or even one of them being sucked. Therefore they are against the project. Bruder , finance and cost accounting manager is also against the project as he feels that there is over costing and thus the project won't' function well. These results in low morale and negative attitude towards the work therefore an effective and high quality work might not take place as they form a majority among the appointed managers. Team contract measure the strengths that the team possesses towards providing a high quality work (Ang & Slaughter, 2001). The strengths include cooperation among the workers, high morale and good organization behavior as there should be good relations among the workers. All this strengths are lacking in FEL team and this will not result in effective performance. Therefore, this project might not succeed according the analysis. Conclusion Running head: FRANKLIN EQUIPMENT LIMITED 9 In summary, FEL has used contingency approach towards assigning tasks to its managers for the Abu Dhabi project team. This criterion selects competent managers and who are able to multi-purpose thus being able to provide quality services. However, the managers who were selected lack the strong cooperation and morale needed for the quality service. This results in high possibilities of the project nit working effectively and thus Jobe should tell Gatenby to request for other managers who have no personal differences if he wants the project to continue and work effectively. Running head: FRANKLIN EQUIPMENT LIMITED 10 References Ang, S., & Slaughter, S. A. (2001). Work outcomes and job design for contract versus permanent information systems professionals on software development teams. Mis Quarterly, 321350. Derntl, M., & Motschnig-Pitrik, R. (2004, March). Patterns for blended, person-centered learning: Strategy, concepts, experiences, and evaluation. In Proceedings of the 2004 ACM symposium on Applied computing (pp. 916-923). ACM. Kumar, V., Maheshwari, B., & Kumar, U. (2003). An investigation of critical management issues in ERP implementation: emperical evidence from Canadian organizations. Technovation, 23(10), 793-807. Larson, E. W., & Gray, C. F. (2011). Project management: The managerial process. Mller, R., & Turner, R. (2007). The influence of project managers on project success criteria and project success by type of project. European Management Journal, 25(4), 298-309. Mller, R., & Turner, R. (2010). Leadership competency profiles of successful project managers. International Journal of Project Management, 28(5), 437-448