This project involved a hospital extension consisting of a nine-storey building and a service building for the power generator and water storage. The project was almost 3 years behind schedule and had just achieved 14% of the work scope. All the project outcomes or the project symptoms showed that the project was severely unhealthy. The only positive indicator identified was the quality of concrete work. Diagnosing the project, it was found that the contractor's project manager was handling this aspect well because of his extensive experience in the concrete industry. Apparently, however, this project manager had good experience with concrete, but was unqualified in project management. The Project Management Office and the client asked the contractor many times to replace the project manager, but this was not carried out. To make matter worse, there were many design changes in the project, which contributed to the delay. Project Key Performance Indicators The following KPIs were obtained from the progress reports, provided by the Project Management Office (PMO), and through the interview with them. Cost: Highly confidential; the contractor could not specify the specific cost, but he mentioned that the project was over budget. Obviously, as the contractor was 30 months behind schedule, overhead costs were increasing. Time: The project did not have a planned expenditure cash flow (S curve), and the project was behind schedule. The proportion of time elapsed for the project was 97.26%, but the proportion of work performed is only 14.05%. Scope: There were many changes in the project's architectural design. Some spaces and bedrooms needed to be redesigned to better use the space; and some spaces did not match with the medical code, such as elevators. Quality: There were neither defects nor rework found in the project. The quality of concrete was better than the requirement, with an exception for a few concrete foundations and columns that were not properly protected, which could result in rusting of the reinforcement. Safety: No safety issue was found that caused a problem to the project; however, it was found that the labourers did not follow basic safety regulations, such as wearing safety helmets and shoes. Satisfaction: The owner was dissatisfied with the project's progress. Project diagnostic (PHC) The level of practice required for this project was 90, based on the complexity of the hospital projects. Unfortunately, the level of practice was found to be far below this target. None of the process enablers were carried out as required. The PHC assessment revealed that the project was managed haphazardly. The significantly large gap between the actual and the target PHC scores could be associated with the poor project KPIs. E.S. Almahmoud et al. / International Journal of Project Management 30 (2012) 296-307 QUESTION 1 1.1A failed projects denotes a misunderstanding of what project performance management is. From your own understanding share what you understand to be project performance management which could have assisted the project team on this failed project (20 Marks) 1.2 One of the causes mentioned in the case study that caused the project to fail was design changes. Critique the importance of the design phase. 1.3 Five KPIs were identified in order to monitor the project, and all of the KPIs seem to have failed. Identify the five (5) KPIs and what was wrong in the KPI. (5 marks) (5 marks) (10 marks)