Read the case study below and answer the questions that follow.

KUSILE, MEDUPI CONCEIVED IN THE 20TH CENTURY, STRUGGLING IN WATER SCARCE 21ST

Not far from Johannesburg, set amid the corn and sunflower fields of the Highveld in Mpumalanga province, stand two unusually thick and tall candy-striped smokestacks, dozens of stout concrete support columns, and the tangled steel superstructure of the unfinished 4 800 MW Kusile coal-fired power station. About 370km northwest, spread across a stretch of dry scrubland in Limpopo province, is the construction site for Kusile's unfinished twin, the 4 800 MW Medupi power station. More than a decade ago, at the turn of the 21st century, South Africa conceived the idea of building Kusile and Medupi, two of the four largest coal plants in the world. The proposal gained significant public prominence around the century's end when South Africa's bid to develop its own nuclear reactor design, and build several plants, was rejected by the global finance community. Medupi and Kusile, designed with advanced water conservation cooling and pollution control systems, and due to be completed by 2014 and 2015, respectively, at a cost of $6bn each, were greeted as both momentous and logical.

Over the last several years, dawn has evolved into a gathering storm. Long construction delays and escalating costs, engineering challenges, and the intensifying risk of scarce water have pushed Kusile and its sister plant into the eye of a typhoon of economic, ecological, and social disturbances engulfing South Africa. In so many ways, the troubled development of Kusile and Medupi, and the tumult enveloping South Africa's deteriorating financial and social condition, are not just mirror images of each other. The two plants, projected to be almost a decade late in completion and $20bn or more over budget, are among the principal causes. The trouble is not simply a matter of managerial missteps. The vortex of disruption that envelops Medupi and Kusile reflects the clash between the economic and ecological operating systems of two centuries. Kusile and Medupi arguably represent the most prominent global examples of big projects that do not fit their time. Conceived in the resource-rich, more ecologically stable, and capitalabundant turn of the century, the two plants were viewed as reasoned answers to South Africa's growing demand for electricity, and as evidence of a new government's capacity to execute complex industrial projects.

South Africa sees its global reputation as tied to completing the two plants.

"They must finish and they will finish," said Jacob Misimango, a 54-year-old business executive in Emalahleni who is seeking permits to start an open cast coal mine outside the city, in part to supply fuel for Kusile. "These projects have drawn the world's attention. They have to finish. Why? "Number one. There is a shortage of electricity. The only solution is these stations. We have coal to fuel them. "Two. It's important for our government to prove we can do this thing. Our national pride is at stake. Not being able to finish is demoralizing. We must prove we can finish. "Three. There is a lot of interest on loans that we have to pay back. We need to finish to pay back those loans." 2

Big ideas encounter tumult

But well over a decade after they were initially proposed, both plants, and their builder, are crashing into the projectdebilitating limits of the resource-scarce, ecologically unstable, and nervous financial markets of the advancing 21st century. Said another way, the narrative of economic progress, expressed by gargantuan industrial projects and centralised management practices, is breaking apart under intense ecological pressure. "Medupi and Kusile are examples of large-scale mega infrastructure projects that countries see as the basis of a development model that started after World War II," said Janet Redman, director of the Climate Program at the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington, DC, and an authority on World Bank loan programs. "Projects this large are seen as transformational. They cost a lot. They employ a lot of people. Their effects are meant to be big. But it's a model that doesn't make much sense now.

By now, all of the six steam turbines at the Kusile power station, each capable of generating 800 MW of electricity, were supposed to be operating with water-conserving, air quality-preserving, state of the art fossil fuel-fired efficiency. The anticipated commercial opening of the mammoth plant was to be celebrated as a globally significant statement about a new democracy's capacity to think big, and prove that an African government can deliver fresh currents of electricity to growing cities and modern industries. Perhaps the original five-year construction schedule was too ambitious. Certainly, the initial estimate of Kusile's completed cost was too hopeful. Yet what greets visitors to the plant's construction site on the South African Highveld is a mega energy generation project that is setting new international standards for construction delays, cost increases, design and engineering conflicts, and ecological impediments. Last summer, Eskom formally opened the first 800 MW turbine at Medupi. In February Eskom announced the planned opening of the first 800 MW turbine at Kusile, scheduled in 2014 to open during the summer of 2016, was pushed back to sometime in 2018.

QUESTION 4 (20 marks)

You have been requested by the Managing Director of the Medupi Power Station to provide expert advice on several questions relating to how project teams can be managed. What are the key issues that will be included in your response on the question of the tools and techniques that can be considered in developing project teams?

QUESTION 5 (20 marks)

Emzansi Engineers Ltd installs network routers. The project manager Mr Abelanag Senooane has been concerned with the amount of time (weeks) it has been taking to complete several recent jobs. He is therefore determined to implement new and productive resource management techniques. The data obtained (all in days) for their latest contract is listed in Table 1;

Activity Description Predecessor(s) Optimistic Most likely Pessimistic Crash cost/day A Bonding, Insurance 20 30 40 R1.500 and tax structuring B Foundation, concrete A 20 65 80 R3.500 and footings for boxes C Upgrading skybox A 50 60 100 R4.000 stadium seating D Upgrading walkways C 30 50 100 R1.900 E Interior wiring, lathes B 25 30 35 R9.500 F Inspection approvals F 0.1 0.1 0.1 0 G Plumbing D, F 25 30 35 R2.500 H Painting G 10 20 30 R2.000 Hardware/AC and H 20 25 60 R2.000 metal workings Tiling H 8 10 12 R6.000 K Inspection 0.1 0.1 0.1 0 Final detail/work I, K 20 25 60 R4.500 clean-up 5.1 How long is this project expected to take? (14 marks) 5.2 Which activities are on the critical path? (6 marks)