Work Breakdown Structure as a Skeleton for Integration

Matt: I keep looking at this piece of paper and cant believe my eyes, or I must not understand it. Percy: What paper are you looking at? The one I brought? Matt: Yes, let me check if I understand it well. The sheet of paper I am holding shows the work breakdown structure (WBS) for the timely termination of the Opto - Mechanical groups portion of work for Project Lada (see Figure 5.2 ). Is that right? Percy: Yes, right. These beginning moments of the conversation between Matt Boon, the engineering manager of the Opto - Mechanical Group, and Percy Bedge, project manager of Lada, do not promise much cooperation. Rather, the atmosphere in which this conversation in Matt s office takes place smells of the open conflict and apparent tension between the meeting participants.

MICROMANAGEMENT?

Matt: Well, on the second page, it shows an estimate of the person-hours and needed calendar time for each of my engineers involved in Project Lada, from now until the end of it. Percy: Yes. Thats the termination plan for Lada. Whats wrong with it? Matt: I dont want to sound negative, but all of it is wrong from details to philosophy. Percy: Give me details. Matt: Your Lada planning indicates at what days on the calendar and how much you need each of my guys from Opto - Mechanical Group. Thats based

on the assumption that they are engaged in work on only one project, and that s your project, Lada. Those are wrong details. As a matter of fact, they are shared among six projects. Since you scheduled them for certain time periods for which they are already scheduled by other projects with higher priorities, those higher - priority projects automatically obtain my guys. Even if you planned properly, there is another issue for which I would not agree with your WBS and related termination plan. I thought we already resolved the ownership issue. You guys, the project management team, own deliverables from the top three levels of the project WBS. And we, the functional groups, own all deliverables in the lower levels the fourth and below. We own them means we plan them, we execute them, and we control them, which means we monitor and report them to you. You have no right to meddle or control activities on our deliverables, unless we screw up. To remind you, I found the company s PM charter. It shows that this is the current and ruling division of ownership signed - off on by all engineering managers and project management, and senior management.

But you seem to forget or ignore the PM charter, just as you tried to ignore it during Lada s Map Day. With the termination WBS, it appears again that you would like to micromanage us. Percy: I see where you come from. Frankly, my intention was not to micromanage you. Give me a few days to go over it, and I ll get back to you.

Anwers Multiple Chice Question given Below:

1.

1.WBS is best for integration, if

A. WBS has many levels and agreed

B. WBS has fewer levels and agreed

C. WBS is constructed with consensus, with clear description, and clear assignments

D. WBS is implemented by top management with an objective to control at lower levels

2. This is an issue based case study discussing the

A. Construction of WBS and potential disagreement between departments/parties

B. Construction of WBS and integration between the departments

C. Methodology to construct best WBS for the project

D. Methodology to collect information from all departments before constructing WBS

3. The teams were counter argument to micromanagement was based on Single choice.

A.Task owners should plan, execute, control, and report

B. Too much details in WBS

C. Project ownership was not defined well

D. There was no formal project management system

4. WBS was developed without coordinating with staff/departments.

True

False

5. The disagreement between Matt and Percy was on

A. Distribution of work load

B. Project timeline and budget constraints

C. Distribution of authority

D. Tasks distribution, ownership, planning, and control rights

6. What is the project manager of Lada?

A. Matt Boon

B. Percy Bedge

C. Opto-Mechanical Group

D. Non of them

7. The deliverables were clearly agreed and assigned to all teams

True

False

8. What were the major challenges on the project?

A. Team and reporting structure was shared between function and project teams

B. Reporting structure was not defined and team was not assigned

C. No formal project system with no clear timeline

D. Project leadership had no clear tasks and no authority

9. The company's PM charter clearly stated that

A. The whole management agreed on current division of ownerships

B. All the tasks should be assigned by the top management as and when required

C. Project ownership will remain with project manager

D. Top management cannot interfere in departmental matters

10. Percy agreed that

A. Micromanagement was not the intention

B. Micromanagement is the only solution to solve current problems

C. Project management process is necessary

D. Project can be finished on time

Figure 5.2 Project Lada WBS for the Opto-Mechanical Group Project WBS Go da Unclosed Deliverables Unclosed Deliverables of Functional Group 1 of Functional Group n Unclosed Deliverables of Optoel Group 1 LEVEL 1 Lada Project LADA Project Opto-Mechanical Design Work Breakdown Structure Phase 1 LEVEL 2 Opto-Mechanical Project Phases Phase Concept Analysis Phase 2 Design Planning Phase 3 Launch LEVEL 3 Opto-Mechanical Deliverables Inspection & Acceptance of Tooled Parts Validate System Shock Performance Validate Projection Lens to Specification Validate System Optical Performance Verify Mass Production Pilot Build Validate System Mechanical Assembly Validate System Vibration Performance Validate Optical Engine Assembly Approval to Ship Product