the $$article $$below $$and $$answer $$ALL $$questions $$in $$this $$section$.$

The $$Problem $$with $$Priorities

For $$the $$past $$several $$years$,$Kent $$Corporation $$had $$achieved $$remarkable $$success $$in $$winning $$R&D $$on $$tracts$.$The $$customers $$were $$pleased $$with $$the $$analytical $$capabilities $$of $$the $$R&D $$staff $$at $$Kent $$Corporation$.$theoretical $$and $$experimental $$results $$were $$usually $$within $95$percent $$agreement$.$But $$many $$customers $$still $$felt $$that $95$percent $$was $$too $$low$.$They $$wanted $98-99$percent$.$In $1989,$Kent $$updated $$their $$computer $$facility $$by $$purchasing $$a $$large $$computer$.$The $$increased $$performance $$with $$the $$new $$computer $$encouraged $$the $$R&D $$group $$to $$attempt $$to $$convert $$from $$two$-$dimensional $$to $$three$-$dimensional $$solutions $$to $$their $$theoretical $$problems$.$Almost $$everyone $$except $$the $$director $$of $$R&D $$thought $$that $$this $$would $$give $$better $$comparison $$between $$experimental $$and $$theoretical $$data$.$Kent $$Corporation $$had $$tried $$to $$develop $$the $$computer $$program $$for $$three $$dimensional $$solutions $$with $$their $$own $$internal $$R&D $$programs$,$but $$the $$cost $$was $$too $$great$.$Finally$,$after $$a $$year $$of $$writing $$proposals$,$Kent $$Corporation $$convinced $$the $$federal $$government $$to $$sponsor $$the $$project$.$The $$project $$was $$estimated $$at $$$$750,000,$to $$begin $$January $2,1991,$and $$to $$be $$completed $$by $$December $20,1991.$

Dan $$McCord $$was $$selected $$as $$project $$manager$.$Dan $$had $$worked $$with $$the $$EDP $$department $$on $$other $$projects $$and $$knew $$the $$people $$and $$the $$man$-$hour $$standards$.$Kent $$Corporation $$was $$big $$enough $$to $$support $100$simultaneous $$projects$.$With $$so $$many $$projects $$in $$existence $$at $$one $$time$,$continual $$reshuffling $$of $$resources $$was $$necessary$.$The $$corporation $$directors $$met $$every $$Monday $$morning $$to $$establish $$project $$priorities$.$Priorities $$were $$not $$enforced $$unless $$project $$and $$functional $$managers $$could $$not $$agree $$on $$the $$allocation $$and $$distribution $$of $$resources$.$Because $$of $$the $$R&D $$director$\text{'}$s $$persistence$,$the $$computer $$project $$was $$given $$a $$low $$priority$.$This $$posed $$a $$problem $$for $$Dan $$McCord$.$The $$computer $$department $$manager $$refused $$to $$staff $$the $$project $$with $$his $$best $$people$.$As $$a $$result$,$Dan $$had $$severe $$scepticism $$about $$the $$success $$of $$the $$project$.$In $$July$,$two $$other $$project $$managers $$held $$a $$meeting $$with $$Dan $$to $$discuss $$the $$availability $$of $$the $$new $$computer $$model$."$We $$have $$two $$proposals $$that $$we$\text{'}$re $$favoured $$to $$win$,$providing $$that $$we $$can $$state $$in $$our $$proposal $$that $$we $$have $$this $$new $$computer $$model $$available $$for $$use$,"$remarked $$one $$of $$the $$project $$managers$."$We $$have $$a $$low $$priority $$and$,$even $$if $$we $$finish $$the $$job $$on $$time$,$l$\text{'}$m $$not $$sure $$of $$the $$quality $$of $$work $$because $$of $$the $$people $$we $$have $$assigned$,"$said $$Dan$."$How $$do $$you $$propose $$we $$improve $$our $$position$?"$asked $$a $$project $$manager$."$Let$\text{'}$s $$try $$to $$get $$in $$to $$see $$the $$director $$of $$R&D$,"$asserted $$Dan$."$And $$what $$are $$we $$going $$to $$say $$in $$our $$defence$?"$asked $$one $$of $$the $$project $$managers$.$

Project $$Management $$Case $$Studies $$Page $482$

Harold $$Kerzner$,$PhD$.$

Although Dan had leaddershi advantage $,$Dan is not excused from being developed.Give five reasons why Dan should be developed as a project leader.