1. Why did the Titanic sink? [It is more than an iceberg] Consider cause and effects throughout the timeline and give a full explanation of the elements you have choses.
2. How was the Project/Program managed? What leadership do we see being used and how did the management and leadership change throughout?
3. Give a full breakdown of the lessons that can be learned from the Titanic development and sailing. How might these benefit future projects, programs or portfolios to be delivered?

Notes that might help question 3:

Link: https://www.projectmanagement.com/articles/688196/PM-History-Lessons--Titanic

1. Avoid hubris The late 19^th and early 20^th centuries saw remarkable advancements in technology. The phonograph, electric light bulb, automobiles, airplanes and wireless radio are examples of rapid advancement in human ingenuity during that time.

However, those advancements also generated a belief that humanity could overcome any obstacleand created a dangerous level of hubris in human ability. In 1911, Shipbuilders magazine described Titanic as "practically unsinkable," given its design that four compartments could flood and the vessel would remain afloat. That morphed in the public's mind to "unsinkable." This prevailing attitude would form the foundation for decisions that would lead directly to the disaster.[1]

While it is important to have confidence in one's abilities, team and project management processes, never underestimate what can go wrongespecially unknown unknowns. Ships sinking from an iceberg strike were rare, and no one fathomed that situation for Titanic. However, the pride in Titanic's ability played into the ship's leaders ignoring the ice warnings receivedand rushing headlong into disaster.

2. Don't rush the schedule The Olympic class linerswhich included the Titanic, the Olympic (launched in 1911) and the Britannic (1914)had placed exceptional financial pressure on the White Star Line, especially due to incidents that had taken Olympic out of service.[2]

Building the largest and most modern ocean liners in the world while merging new technology into the ships created numerous costly challenges. However, the financial pressure and aforementioned over-confidence led White Star to rush Titanic into service in April 1912 to begin generating revenue.[3] This led to taking shortcuts in training and testing (see below), which contributed to putting the ship at risk in the event of unexpected trouble.

Schedule represents one of the major components of a project, and coming in on time or ahead of schedule signifies a significant achievement. However, obtaining that by taking shortcuts or making risky decisions that could lead to issues during the effort (or after project completion) contains far more downside than upside. If a project manager sees bad outcomes coming from decisions to rush the schedule, they should raise their concerns early. Unlike wine, problems do not age well.

3. Allow time for training/testing Rushing the ship into service included limiting the sea trials to only one day (normally, basin and sea trials lasted four weeks), transferring officers from the Olympic, and hiring the operations crew at the last minuteall of which avoided taking the time to bring on a crew specifically for Titanic and training them on that vessel.[4]

Even with limited sea trials, the Board of Trade certified the steamer (in, at best, a questionable decision).[5] This meant the ship left port with a crew unfamiliar with an immensely complicated liner and barely any testing. The White Star Line attempted to mitigate the risk of limited sea trials by having Chief Architect Thomas Andrews and a team from shipbuilder Harland and Wolff aboard the maiden voyage to review Titanic in real time.[6]

In addition, binoculars were not issued to crow's nest crew, and lifeboat drills with crew were limitedand with passengers not held, meaning these complicated devices remained virtually unused in any manner until the disaster unfolded.[7]

Training and testing remain essential in the implementation of any project deliverable, but especially so if that product represents a leap in technology. The size and scope of Titanic had never been seen (even with the Olympic), and skimping on training added another dimension that put the ship at risk.

4. Acknowledge risks Numerous ships had encountered icebergs on April 14, 1912and had radioed the Titanic of their existence.[8] When warned of ice, most ships in that era would stop for the night and await the morning to continue. However, these warnings went unheeded by Captain Smithand he even ordered the ship to increase speed. His decision represents one of the gravest mistakes in maritime history. [9]

In most cases, risks do not immediately happen on a project; some warning usually occurs. Comprehensive risk planning and monitoring will reduce project risk. Ignoring risks as they arise can lead to tragedy as it did for Titanic.

5. Don't ignore warning signs Warning signs about the handling of the new Olympic class liners did occur. In 1911, the Olympic collided with the HMS Hawke, causing major damage to the liner, and two other incidents with Titanic's sister ship also occurred.[10] This took the ship out of service for months and delayed Titanic's launch, all of which added to the financial strain on the White Star Line.[11] This alone should have warned those involved to schedule thorough sea trials for Titanic.

In addition, the Titanic almost collided with a ship while leaving Southampton on April 10, 1912, further emphasizing the crew's challenges learning to handle these new larger vessels.[12] After spotting the iceberg, Titanic First Officer Murdoch attempted an S-turn maneuver, but the ship turned more slowly than smaller ships within the officers' experience and Titanic struck the ice.[13] Thorough sea trials (see #3 above) might have provided time for training on handling Titanic in an emergency situation.[14]

Issues and problems rarely suddenly arise. Most often, they begin smalland if they aren't dealt with, grow into serious situations. If the White Star Line had taken the time to thoroughly investigate the issues with Olympic, it may have instituted changes to the process of bringing Titanic on-lineincluding thorough sea trials and training for a crew specifically chosen for the ship. A project manager ignores warning signs at their own peril.

6. Avoid project sponsor micromanagement The chairman of the White Star Line, J. Bruce Ismay, travelled with Titanic on its maiden voyage. Circumstantial evidence exists that he may have pressured Captain Smith to set a rapid schedule to beat Olympic's best crossing time and garner favorable free publicity for the ship and his business. His presence and possible insistence on maintaining speed may have impacted Captain Smith's decision to ignore the ice warnings and continue at an unsafe pace.[15]

While history may never know for sure what exactly transpired between Ismay and Captain Smith, given the nature of a boss to subordinate (especially the CEO) suggests that the White Star chairman most likely voiced his opinion on the ships operation, which may have contributed to the cataclysm that befell the ship.

Conclusion The RMS Titanic's doom remains one of the greatest disasters to occur at sea. While it may appear that fate dealt the ship and its passengers and crew a tragic hand, in reality, a prideful attitude about the ship's capabilitiesalong with numerous bad decisionsput the ship at great risk in the event of an unexpected danger.

The liner's sinking remains an abject lesson in what not to do on a project. Mark Kozak-Holland's exceptional book Project Management Blunders: Lessons from the Project that Built, Launched, and Sank Titanic represents a comprehensive study of the Titanic from a project perspective and comes highly recommended