MGT 252 Assignment 61 Assume Your Project Has Started

Mgt 252assignment 61 Assume That Your Project Has Started To Slip Dra

Assume that your project has started to slip dramatically. Let’s further assume that the project deadline is fixed and can't change. Your project currently has one developer working on a module of code with a 21-day duration on the critical path. You are considering adding a second resource to this activity to shorten the timeframe, but the resource does not have all the right skills and might work five days to reduce the overall time by two days. From an economic perspective, is this a good move? Why?

Gold plating is when the project team adds features not called for in the requirements, which stakeholders and customers did not ask for and do not need. Is this a good practice from an economic perspective? Why?

What is the difference between project managers who see themselves as implementers of others’ solutions versus those who view themselves as the CEO of a small business?

Paper For Above instruction

The scenario presented in this assignment highlights several critical aspects of project management, including resource allocation, cost-benefit analysis, scope management, and leadership perspective. Analyzing these points provides insight into best practices for managing project delays and the implications of certain management philosophies.

Firstly, addressing the question of adding a secondary resource to the critical task that is behind schedule demonstrates the importance of understanding resource efficiency and cost-effectiveness in project management. When a project is delayed, project managers often consider crashing the schedule—adding additional resources to accelerate completion. In this case, however, the additional resource lacks adequate skills and will only contribute a two-day reduction at the cost of five days of effort. Economically, this move warrants careful analysis.

From a cost perspective, the primary concern is whether the marginal cost of adding the unskilled resource justifies the benefit of the schedule reduction. If the cost of five days of work at the unskilled rate exceeds the value of delivering the project two days earlier—considering potential unseen costs such as rework, coordination complexities, and diminished quality—it is not a sound economic decision. On the other hand, if the project’s penalties for delay are significant and the cost of extra effort is lower than the risk of missing the deadline, then this strategy may be justified. However, generally, from an economics standpoint, paying for unskilled labor that results in marginal gains tends to be inefficient and could result in increased total project costs and compromised quality.

Secondly, the concept of gold plating in project management refers to scope creep beyond the original requirements, often driven by a desire to enhance the product. While it might seem beneficial to add extra features, from an economic perspective, gold plating is usually counterproductive. Extra features that aren’t requested increase costs without corresponding value, and may delay the project further, consume additional resources, and introduce potential risks like bugs or maintenance issues post-deployment.

Additionally, gold plating is often associated with scope creep, which can damage stakeholder trust and inflate budgets. Since the primary goal of project management is to deliver value efficiently, gold plating introduces unnecessary costs without stakeholder approval, ultimately diminishing the project's ROI (Return on Investment). Therefore, from an economic perspective, gold plating is typically considered a bad practice unless aligned with revised stakeholder agreements that justify additional expenditures.

Thirdly, the difference between project managers who see themselves as implementers versus those who consider themselves as the CEO of a small business lies chiefly in leadership approach and strategic outlook. The “implementer” tends to focus on executing predefined solutions, often adhering strictly to outlined tasks without significant strategic input or innovation. This role emphasizes operational efficiency and following directives.

Conversely, project managers who view themselves as the CEO of a small business adopt a broader, strategic perspective. They assume responsibility for the project's overall success, profit margins, stakeholder relationships, and long-term value creation. This mindset entails proactive decision-making, stakeholder engagement, risk management, and aligning project objectives with organizational goals. Such project managers tend to be more entrepreneurial, innovative, and accountable for the entire project lifecycle.

In essence, the “implementer” mindset may limit a project manager’s influence to the tactical execution, whereas adopting a "CEO" approach empowers them to oversee strategic alignment, resource optimization, and stakeholder satisfaction, leading to higher project success rates and organizational impact.

The distinction is crucial: effective project management incorporates both operational excellence and strategic leadership, enabling project managers to adapt dynamically and deliver maximum value.

In conclusion, this assignment underscores fundamental principles in project management principles, emphasizing the importance of cost-effective decision-making, scope control, and leadership perspective. Making informed decisions about resource allocation to time-sensitive tasks, avoiding unnecessary scope additions such as gold plating, and fostering a strategic leadership approach are vital for successful project delivery, especially under constraints such as fixed deadlines.

References

• Kerzner, H. (2017). Project management: A systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling. John Wiley & Sons.
• PMI. (2021). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide). Project Management Institute.
• Meredith, J. R., & Mantel, S. J. (2017). Project management: A managerial approach. John Wiley & Sons.
• Larson, E., & Gray, C. (2018). Project management: The managerial process. McGraw-Hill Education.
• Schwalbe, K. (2018). Information technology project management. Cengage Learning.
• Harrison, F., & Lock, D. (2017). Practical project management. Hodder Education.
• Lewis, J. P. (2019). Fundamentals of project management. AMACOM.
• Kinzer, P. (2019). Managing projects for dummies. John Wiley & Sons.
• Heldman, K. (2018). PMP: Project management professional exam study guide. Sybex.
• Gido, J., & Clements, J. (2018). Successful project management. Cengage Learning.