In recent years, there has been an effort to substantially improve the formation and makeup of teams required to develop a new product or implement a new practice. These teams have membership from across the entire organization and are called integrated product/project teams (IPTs). The IPT consists of a sponsor, program manager, and the core team. For the most part, members of the core team are assigned full-time to the team but may not be on the team for the duration of the entire project.
The skills needed to be a member of the core team include:
● Self-starter ability
● Work without supervision
● Good communication skills
● Cooperative
● Technical understanding
● Willing to learn backup skills
● Able to perform feasibility studies and cost/benefit analyses
Integrated Product/Project Teams 333
● Able to perform or assist in market research studies
● Able to evaluate asset utilization
● Decision-maker
● Knowledgeable in risk management
● Understand the need for continuous validation
Each IPT is given a project charter that identifies the project’s mission and identifies the assigned project manager. However, unlike traditional charters, the IPT charter can also identify the key members of the IPT by name or job responsibility.
Unlike traditional project teams, the IPT thrives on sharing information across the team and collective decision-making. IPTs eventually develop their own culture and, as such, can function in either a formal or informal capacity.
Since the concept of an IPT is well suited to large, long-term projects, it is no wonder that the Department of Defense has been researching best practices for an IPT.8The gov-
TABLE 8–4. EFFECTIVE IPTS
Program Cost Status Schedule Status Performance Status
Daimler-Chrysler Product cost was Decreased development cycle Improved vehicle designs lowered months by 50 percent
Hewlett-Packard Lowered cost by Shortened development Improved system integration over 60 percent schedule by over 60 percent and product design 3M Outperformed Product deliveries shortened by Improved performance by
cost goals 12 to 18 months 80 percent
Advanced Product unit cost Ahead of original development Demonstrated fivefold
Amphibious lower than schedule increase in speed
Assault Vehicle original estimate
TABLE 8–5. INEFFECTIVE IPTS
Program Cost Status Schedule Status Performance Status
CH-60S Increased cost but due to Schedule delayed Software and structural
Helicopter additional purchases difficulties
Extended Range Increases in development Schedule slipped three Redesigning due to
Guided costs years technical difficulties
Munitions
Global Broadcast Experiencing cost growth Schedule slipped 1.5 Software and hardware
Service years design shortfalls
Land Warrior Cost increase of about Schedule delayed four Overweight equipment,
50 percent years inadequate battery
power and design
8. DoD Teaming Practices Not Achieving Potential Results,Best Practices Series, GOA-01-501, Government Accounting Office, April 2001.
ernment looked at four projects, in both the public and private sectors, which were highly successful using the IPT approach and four government projects that had less than accept- able results. The successful IPT projects are shown in Table 8–4. The unsuccessful IPT projects are shown in Table 8–5. In analyzing the data, the government came up with the results shown in Figure 8–10. Each vertical line in Figure 8–10 is a situation where the IPT must go outside of its own domain to seek information and approvals. Each time this hap- pens, it is referred to as a “hit.” The government research indicated that the greater the number of hits, the more likely it is that the time, cost, and performance constraints will not be achieved. The research confirmed that if the IPT has the knowledge necessary to make decisions, and also has the authority to make the decisions, then the desired perfor- mance would be achieved. Hits will delay decisions and cause schedule slippages.
PROBLEMS
8–1 Beta Company has decided to modify its wage and salary administration program whereby line managers are evaluated for promotion and merit increases based on how well they have lived up to the commitments that they made to the project managers. What are the advan- tages and disadvantages of this approach?
8–2 How should a project manager handle a situation in which the functional employee (or functional manager) appears to have more loyalty to his profession, discipline, or expertise than to the project? Can a project manager also have this loyalty, say, on an R&D project?
8–3 Most wage and salary administrators contend that project management organizational structures must be “married” to the personnel evaluation process because personnel are always
Problems 335
FIGURE 8–10. Knowledge and authority.
Life-Cycle Phases Project Team Others
Customer
Sponsor S
t a k e h o l d e r s
concerned with how they will be evaluated. Furthermore, converting from a traditional struc- ture to a project management structure cannot be accomplished without first considering per- formance evaluation. What are your feelings on this?
8–4 As part of the evaluation process for functional employees, each project manager submits a written, confidential evaluation report to the employee’s department manager who, in turn, makes the final judgment. The employee is permitted to see only the evaluation from his de- partment manager. Assume that the average department merit increase is 7 percent, and that the employee could receive the merit increases shown in the following table. How would he re- spond in each case?
Project Manager’s Merit Credit or Blame to
Evaluation Increase, % P.M. Fct. Mgr. Reason
Excellent 5
Excellent 7
Excellent 9
Average 5
Average 7
Average 9
Poor 5
Poor 7
Poor 9
8–5 Should the evaluation form in Figure 8–4 be shown to the employees?
8–6 Does a functional employee have the right to challenge any items in the project man- ager’s nonconfidential evaluation form?
8–7 Some people contend that functional employees should be able to evaluate the effective- ness of the project manager after project termination. Design an evaluation form for this purpose.
8–8 Some executives feel that evaluation forms should not include cooperation and attitude.
The executives feel that a functional employee will always follow the instructions of the func- tional manager, and therefore attitude and cooperation are unnecessary topics. Does this kind of thinking also apply to the indirect evaluation forms that are filled out by the project managers?
8–9 Consider a situation in which the project manager (a generalist) is asked to provide an evaluation of a functional employee (a specialist). Can the project manager effectively evaluate the functional employee on technical performance? If not, then on what information can the project manager base his evaluation? Can a grade-7 generalist evaluate a grade-12 specialist?
8–10 Gary has been assigned as a part-time, assistant project manager. Gary’s duties are split between assistant project management and being a functional employee. In addition, Gary re- ports both vertically to his functional manager and horizontally to a project manager. As part of his project responsibilities, Gary must integrate activities between his department and two other departments within his divison. His responsibilities also include writing a nonconfiden- tial performance evaluation for all functional employees from all three departments that are assigned to his project. Can Gary effectively and honestly evaluate functional employees in his own department—people with whom he will be working side by side when the project is over? Should the project manager come to his rescue? Suppose Gary is a part-time project manager instead of a part-time assistant project manager. Can anyone come to his rescue now?
8–11 The following question was asked of executives: How do you know when to cut off re- search? The answers given: That’s a good question, a very good question, and some people don’t know when to cut it off. You have to have a feel; in some cases it depends on how much resource you have and whether you have enough resources to take a chance on sustaining re- search that may appear to be heading for a dead end. You don’t know sometimes whether you’re heading down the wrong path or not; sometimes it’s pretty obvious you ought to shift direc- tions—you’ve gone about as far as you can or you’ve taken it far enough that you can demon- strate to your own satisfaction that you just can’t get there from here, or it’s going to be very costly. You may discover that there are more productive ways to get around the barrier; you’re always looking for faster ways. And it depends entirely on how creative the person is, whether he has tunnel vision, a very narrow vision, or whether he is fairly flexible in his conceptual thinking so that he can conceive of better ways to solve the problem. Discuss the validity of these remarks.
8–12 In a small company, can a functional manager act as director of engineering and director of project management at the same time?
8–13 In 1982, an electrical equipment manufacturer decentralized the organization, allowing each division manager to set priorities for the work in his division. The division manager of the R&D division selected as his number one priority project the development of low-cost methods for manufacturing. This project required support from the manufacturing division. The division manager for manufacturing did not assign proper resources, claiming that the results of such a project would not be realized for at least five years, and that he (the manufacturing manager) was worried only about the immediate profits. Can this problem be resolved and divisional de- centralization still be maintained?
8–14 The executives of a company that produces electro-optical equipment for military use found it necessary to implement project management using a matrix. The project managers re- ported to corporate sales, and the engineers with the most expertise were promoted to project engineering. After the first year of operation, it became obvious to the executives that the engi- neering functional managers were not committed to the projects. The executives then made a critical decision. The functional employees selected by the line managers to serve on projects would report as a solid line to the project engineer and dotted to the line manager. The project engineers, who were selected for their technical expertise, were allowed to give technical di- rection and monetary rewards to the employees. Can this situation work? What happens if an employee has a technical question? Can he go to his line manager? Should the employees re- turn to their former line managers at project completion? What are the authority/responsibility problems with this structure? What are the long-term implications?
Problems 337
8–15 Consider the four items listed on page 123 that describe what happens when a matrix goes out of control. Which of these end up creating the greatest difficulty for the company? for the project managers? for the line managers? for executives?
8–16 As a functional employee, the project manager tells you, “Sign these prints or I’ll fire you from this project.” How should this situation be handled?
8–17 How efficient can project management be in a unionized, immobile manpower environment?
8–18 Corporate salary structures and limited annual raise allocations often prevent proper proj- ect management performance rewards. Explain how each of the following could serve as a mo- tivational factor:
a. Job satisfaction b. Personal recognition c. Intellectual growth
The Variables for Success
339 Related Workbook Exercises and
Related Case Studies Case Studies (from Kerzner/Project PMBOK®Reference (from Kerzner/Project Management Workbook to Accompany Section for the PMP® Management Case Studies) Project Management,8th Edition) Certification Exam
• Como Tool and Die (A) • Multiple Choice Exam • All PMBOK®
• Como Tool and Die (B) • Processes