Respond to this post and give feedback. The Wasa project had many issues. from the start. One of the main issues is the link of leadership, although it was the Kings project, Henrick should have taken the lead on the building on the instead allowing the King to make decisions. Henrick did not communicate to the King the negative effects all his modificiations would have on the project. It is a great example of when one stakeholder gets to make all the decisions and others did get to put in their opinion. Although the King was sponosoring the build of the ship, Henrick was the one who had the experience in building the ship. Also the constant change to the timeline had a major effect on the downfall of the Wasa. The constant timeline changes made it easier for mistakes and for Henrick to have to cut corners. Again, Henrick should have taken the lead as Project Manager and communicated to the King that the timeline should have stayed consistent. Also the King, should have investigated both Henricks and Heinz experience as the project progressed to determine if they could have even succesfully build the ship. Both Henricks and Heinz should have communicated as well that they did not have the experience. The downfall of the Wasa came from three major problems in the lack of planning: lack of leadership, timeline changes, and lack of communication. If Henrick, who had more experience than the King did not allow the King to bulldoze the project it could have been a success.It is an perfect example of how contant scope changes can have an huge affect on a project. Constant. changes to a project leads to a breakdown in communication, lack of leadership, and the inability to successfully reach deliverables