Project_Plan__Remington_Peckinpaw_Davis_Inc.

Running head: PROBLEM SOLUTION: Remington Peckinpaw Davis Inc. Project Plan: Remington Peckinpaw Davis Inc. Your Name University of Phoenix Problem Solution: Remington Peckinpaw Davis Inc. The Remington Peckinpaw Davis Inc. (RPD), stands at a significant crossroads within their internal operations of the company. They have some prevalent project coordination issues that must be dealt with in order to properly stay on track of finances and reach desires objectives. Talented personnel exists throughout the company, but their skills are currently not being maximized. The following research paper will examine the virtual organization Remington Peckinpaw Davis Inc (RPD). It will discuss their many current issues, and the options available for them to make a change for a better tomorrow. Situation Analysis Issue and Opportunity Identification RPD first must stop right where it’s at and somewhat start over. They need to go back to basics and clearly define their objectives. This is first step in defining the project scope and it the basis for the entire project as it is what they will work towards (Gray & Larson, 2006). From there the company can develop a more firm outline of just how a the company will utilize resources in order to achieve their desired goals. A work breakdown structure (WBS) is another beneficial tool that ties into this approach as it serves as a map for laying out how the project team will coordinate the use of necessary resources (Gray & Larson, 2006). . It is so important that a company has a plan in place that utilizes time, personnel, and all other potential resources that it will take to complete the necessary tasks. Within this is the definition the roles of the project managers. The project managers as extremely vital in the process as they must be able to maximize the outputs of all of their resources, by taking accountability for their own actions and delegating other tasks to those capable of getting the job done. Along with structural needs, RPD must also improve in two other key areas: Estimating and technology development. Estimating is another vital area of planning that sets realistic goals in which the company can work towards. It defines how finances must be utilized under given timelines and this provides the company what it needs to get a project completed efficiently. RPD has been very weak in this area, and even though is it a given that the can’t always be accurately predicted, being as close as possible is key to the health of the company. Technology is similar in that it can also bring with it unforeseen complications. RPD has found this out the hard way recently as new programs have not worked efficiently and it has undoubtely lead to the loss of accounts. RPD must look to improve here by having better testing done to new technologies before they are implemented and by having a contigency plan in place that defines a solid back up plan when technologies don’t function properly. Stakeholder Perspectives/Ethical Dilemmas Stakeholders and ethical perspectives are always areas for concern for any organization. Throughout the various levels of personnel from top management, to middle management, to each and every other employee, it remains a key of area for management to assess and prevent any potential issues. Senior management sits at the forefront as they do not want to lose valuable time and money when running their company. This same concept transcends through middle management as they are the key figures in the delegation of daily operations and decision making. All other employees must then work with respects to others and in a manner that conducive to the strong health of the company. End-State Vision The RPD organization will develop their leadership and organizational structure, along establishing a clearly defined outline for resource coordination in completing desired objectives to meet the needs of customers. Gap Analysis The RPD company has the necessary project tools and resources at in front of them to that can be utilized to turn things around and start moving a more positive direction. Leadership and accompanying personnel of projects must collectively join to define objectives, and set forth to fulfill the necessary goals in reaching these objectives. Better estimating lies in the personnel’s ability to perform more thorough examination of data and by utilizing personnel that have adequate experience within this realm. Technologies should be given the necessary time and finances to work towards ensuring better efficiency and in minimizing errors for customers. Overall, the company has many issues that must be dealt with, but by working on defining clear direction and roles, they will be able to build in all other areas to become a healthier company. Reference Gray, C, & Larson, E. (2006). Project Management: The Managerial Process. The McGraw-Hill Companies. University of Phoenix. (2010). Scenario Two: Remington Peckinpaw Davis Inc.Company Overview. Retrieved June, 14, 2010 form University of Phoenix, Week 4, rEsource, MMPBL510 Table 1 Issue and Opportunity Identification |Issue |Opportunity |Reference to Specific | | | |Course Concept | | | |(Include citation) | |The RDP organization lacks a clearly defined|Having an outline of the project is a tool|“Project scope definition is a document that will | |project scope. This is shown by their lack |that can be utilized to give a project |published and used by the project owner and project | |of direction and their lack of a course of |team the direction that they need to work |participants for planning measuring project success,” | |action. |towards their overall objectives. It is a|(Gray & Larson, 2006). | | |project checklist that goes from defining | | | |the project objectives all the way to the | | | |customer reviews and outcome of the | | | |projects (Gray & Larson, 2006). | | |Again very little direction within the |The WBS is a map for the entire. It lays |“Use of the work breakdown structure (WBS) helps to | |project team at RDP. There is not a map in |out all of the resources details and all |assure project managers that all products and work | |place that coordinates any of the individual|of the necessary coordination of these |elements are identified, to integrate the project with | |steps that must be utilized to move towards |resources (Gray & Larson, 2006). |current organization, and to establish a basis for | |completing objectives. | |control,” (Gray & Larson, 2006). | |RDP Inc. seems to be lacking team unity and |How the company personnel functions |“Organizational culture shapes every dimension of | |has poor leadership. Leaders are pointing |together is extremely vital to the success|project management,” (Gray & Larson, 2006). | |fingers instead of taking some |of a project. It takes skills and | | |accountability for their jobs. |personality traits that can work | | | |efficiently together and work towards an | | | |overall goal. | | | RDP is failing miserably in the estimating |Estimating is crucial area of project |“Inaccurate estimates lead to false expectations and | |area. They have unrealistic numbers that |planning and coordination. It allows for |consumer dissatisfaction,” (Gray & Larson, 2006). | |which does little good for the company, as |proper financing within timelines and sets| | |they are only working towards false |realistic goals for a company to work | | |expectations. |towards. | | |RPD newest programs for their customers have|Technology is an area the companies |“…a new technology usually carries more time and cost | |created issues as they have faced several |utilize everyday to make their companies |risks than a proven process,” (Gray & Larson, 2006). | |technical errors. Sometimes these types of |better. However, technologies bring with | | |occurrences are inevitable, but in this |them risk and they must be managed | | |scenario RPD has little in place to combat |effectively. | | |the errors. There was not a contingency | | | |plan in place that would serve as effective | | | |back plan in case this did occur. | | | Table 2 Stakeholder Perspectives | | |Stakeholder Perspectives and Ethical Dilemmas | | | | | |Stakeholder Groups with Competing | | | |Values |The Interests, Rights, and |The Ethical Dilemma Based on the Competing | | |Values of Each Group |Values | |List: Group X | | | |versus Group Y | | | |Senior Management |Profitable, ethical, responsible, loyalty, fairness, |Operating business ethically in how they hire, | | |integrity, communicative |fire, and promote employees. | |Middle Management |Authoritative, innovative, communicative, fairness, |Similar to senior management in that they must | | |ethical, time oriented, |use employees ethically to prevent issues from | | | |arising. | |All remaining employees |Loyal, hard working, respectful, productive, honest, |Employees should work together with other | | |accountability |employees in a manner that is respectful and | | | |they should also hold themselves accountable | | | |for their actions. | Table 3 End State Goals |End-State Goals | |Clearly defined project scope that outlines the coordination of resources. | |Defined organizational structure that places the correct personnel in positions that maximize their outputs. | |Job structure and roles more clearly defined to give employees better entitlement and give accountability to each and every employee. | |Accurate estimating that falls in line with realistic goals and within the desired plans of the organization. | |Reinforced technological programs and back programs that minimize any possible technical difficulties. |