Work Breakdown Structure as a Skeleton for Integration Wilson Clark and Dragan Z. Milosevic Matt: I keep looking at this piece of paper and can t 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 group s 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 offi ce takes place smells of the open confl ict 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. That s the termination plan for Lada. What s wrong with it? Matt: I don t 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. That s 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 micro- manage you. Give me a few days to go over it, and I ll get back to you. Discussion items 1. What are the pros and cons of having many levels of WBS? 2. Do you prefer a few or many levels of WBS? Why? .Brief Introduction (150 words),

1.What is the business of the company?

2.What problem company is facing?

3.What is the phase of Project Management?

2.Conclusion (150 words)

1.What lesson you have learned from this case study?