Few comparisons between traditional project execution and Jaguar project are as follows: Strategy Traditional Project Execution Jaguar Project Execution Project scope Goals of the project were not defined clearly up front many features during development that hindered in delivery time & quality Requirements & scope were very clearly defined and focused. Huge emphasis in defining process, risk mitigation and scope Delivery date was finalized and adding scopes during development was not allowed PM tools
Dryness’s culture was to mandate the use of specific tools, but it was left up to the individual divisions and managers to decide Formalized project management tools like WEBS, 3-point estimation, critical path analysis, earned value analysis were used Visibility to higher management There was very less visibility to higher management on the project status and phase Clear visibility and tracking was possible.
Detailed schedule and analyzed the impact of delays Project status tracking Progress tracking was highly variable (even within divisions, some were using ‘phase- ate’ model, detailed project planning, conduction after-action reviews, whereas others were not) Usage of tools resulting in near accurate tracking of project status Monthly core team meetings Test strategy Market-segment-focused platform for testing There was different test platform for each market segment Embrace single flexible & consolidated testing platform Unified testing Mostly over committed Correct commitment was provided.
No over-commitment, if resources not available 2. What impact did the PM tools have on the Jaguar project? Specifically, how did they change behavior? How did they influence performance? The Jaguar project used several PM tools to track the progress of the project. A 3-point estimation was used to define minimum (best case), maximum (worst case) and expected timeshares. The project also used a robust scheduling tool Primeval to help track the critical path at each point of the project.
Other formalized PM tools such as WEBS and earned value analysis together enabled to execute PM practices including up-front project landing, project tracking, and a more structured development process. These tools had a large impact and helped the Jaguar project for successfully & timely completion. 3. What were the unintended consequences of using the PM tools? What lessons should Terabyte take away from the Jaguar project?
Some of the unintended consequences of using the PM tools are discussed below: Employees and development teams did not feel that it is their responsibility for project delivery and expected higher management to govern More development sources were wasted due to the training, tracking and status update meetings The need to update status and maintain the PM tools created a diversion for the development teams from the real problems The management did not understand some of the metric and decide to use the one that was easier and understandable.
This did not reflect on the correct project status Lessons should Terabyte take away from the Jaguar project Value and importance of the PM tools has to be taught to the project manager teams The need to understand and report the most important metric has to be training.
Project management maturity assessment to identify strengths and weakness, and areas of improvement in the organizations project management practice The use of PM tools required a cultural change There is a need for continuous monitoring of the project progress Process is not important, but the capable people has to be there to execute these process Information overload should be avoided PM tools cannot be used for the development stuff where there is lots of uncertainty 4. What additional observations do you have about the case based upon your analysis?
Terabyte had used PM tools to force discipline in the development process, which not only provided visibility into the case but also helped to finish the project on time. At Terabyte, the output of a development project was Judged by two criteria: first, did the project achieve its target objectives and, second, did it build new organizational capabilities for future projects? Overall, this was a great case study and mostly covers all the important aspect and teaches the lesson of how to be a
