Sodor Oil Terminal Project Management and Control

Title: Critical Evaluation of Sodor project team performance on the Sodor oil terminal design, planning and construction

Module Name: Project Management and Control

Project: Sodor Oil Terminal Project

Summary

This critical appraisal seeks to come up with a methodical assessment of the Sodor Oil Terminal, Planning and Construction Project. It involves an analysis of the project and different aspects of the management approach employed by my team (5) from start to finish. The appraisal approaches the exercise from the standpoint that the requisite project management tools and techniques were applied in all phases of the project. The critical appraisal is based on principles and ideas gleaned from project management theories, journals, case studies and real-life experiences. In the end, the evaluation concluded that the Sodor Oil Project followed relevant project management tools and techniques and was overall well managed. The report on the project’s critical evaluation mainly draws supportive literature from journals associated with project management.

Introduction

Manzoor et al. (2011) concluded from an evaluation of real-life experience and project management literature that project success is a virtually assured outcome if applicable project planning techniques and procedures are used accordingly. These tools and techniques include pertinent planning, effective communication, teamwork, monitoring and evaluation, exceptional problem-solving ability, change management abilities, delivery reviews, excellent implementation of project strategy, project reviews, milestone checklists, Gantt chart and scorecards among others (Baker and Day, 2006). That being the case, excellent management skills were absolutely paramount for the success of the Sodor Oil Project. At the end of the report, concluding remarks as well as recommendations on project management will be given. The MS Project Baseline Plan at the beginning and the closeout baseline plan are attached to the appendix.

CRITICAL REVIEW OF HOW THE TEAM WAS ORGANISED

The end goal of the Sodor Project was the construction of an Oil Terminal on the isle of Sodor near Kirk, Ronan.

Team formation

The project began with the selection of a five-member team, the scheduling of biweekly meetings and setting the team’s goals as designing, planning and constructing the terminal.

The frequent meetings were instrumental in enhancing team building as well as in setting specific objectives to guide the team to achieve the intended goals. During the meetings, the team discussed and highlighted the importance of effective communication, team roles, interpersonal leadership skills, and commitment to the project goals. Huang (2013) describes shared leadership as a collective leadership technique which is effective in promoting the commitment of members. Kramer and Crespy (2011) concur with this view, arguing that shared leadership enhances a collaborative approach to members of the group. The team duly agreed to follow this approach in the implementation of the project. Under this approach, every group member was afforded a chance to exercise leadership over other members of the group periodically and on specific tasks. Wi et al. (2009) cited that, choosing a competent leader for the position of managing a team and having competent members collaborate as a team is a key to accomplishment in a project. For the purpose of precise control, where each member was aware of their specific role, we chose to apply the team role theory as put forward by Belbin (Aritzeta, Swailes, and Senior, 2007). The approach also helped in selecting a manager and assigning specific roles to each member based on their strengths, weaknesses and professional expertise. The team was broken up into five roles; project manager, IT assistant, who assisted in updating the project plan, assistant project manager, who performed the minute-taking, vendor selection investigator, who took the task of selecting the vendor and account/financial officer, produced the cost model for the Sodor project. The core role of the manager was that of supervising the project as a whole as well as coordinating and assigning duties to other members of the team (Baker and Day, 2006).

Team Communication

With the absolute need for effective communication and project success in mind as laid out by Ramsing (2009), the team devised a strategy for achieving effective communication throughout the life-cycle of the project; effective communication is necessary for each project as it helps in setting out and achieving outlined objectives in the foreseen timeline. Effective communication and information management are two useful tools in the designing of project management structures (Mazzei and Ravazzani, 2011). In view of this fact, the team decided to apply a variety of communication channels, including phone calls, Whatsapp messaging apps and email among others. Google Mail and Dropbox were picked as the platforms of choice for sharing project materials, and this was expected to help us to follow the projected project milestones and critical path.

Team Motivation

It is regularly to team members’ greatest advantage to join a project team in order to complete their tasks in a more proficient way (Zhu, Huang and Contractor, 2013). For example, in a situation whereby a team member with less experience and low skills would bring about a high cost; taking quite a long time or a high risk of inability to finish a task by themselves. In this way, the team member has more utilitarian needs to collaborate with other team members to accomplish assigned tasks. In addition, by working in teams and watching other team members carry out tasks, low-skilled members might learn from highly-skilled team members and enhance their skills. However, few members of the team had little or fewer skills in utilising the MS project tool during the Sodor project plan, hence we adopted a mutual interest and collective action to motivate the team for effective collaborative work.

Team Commitment

In a project team, the success of the team falls apart when the team members lack commitment. Commitment is one of the main considerations to aid the project to enhance and accomplish its objectives; every member of the team puts in their best amid the time work as team members. When the project team members are committed, everyone in the team will appreciate sojourning and performing towards the development of the team. According to Permarupan et al. (2013), Team commitment is the strength of the team members’ identification with the objectives of the project team. At this point, the project team members discovered how important each and every member was to the team, and how helpful we would be to the project.

Vanvuuren et al. (2008) Suggested that team standards and guideline comparability are the strong structure of good conduct and commitment. Once the project team is committed to the tasks being carried out, all team members will definitely acquire more skills we didn’t possess.

Time Factor

Time has always been the most valuable factor in our lives, and this is one of the good things I have learnt from working in a project team. However, there were some time constraints that affected some team members, such as; family issues (picking up kids from school, travelling to home country: family in crisis, etc.); being absent from a few meetings and peer reviews during the Sodor project game, but the team connectedness enabled us to work collaboratively to achieve our designated goals.

Douglas, Bore and Munro, (2015) describe time management as personality functioning and self-regulated learning. Arguing that team members with these behaviours; plan, organise, set goals, self-monitoring and self-evaluation, and as well as report high self-efficacy, attributions and intrinsic interest in any task. To support this view, Claessen et al. (2007) Specified time management behaviour as practices that aim at accomplishing an effective utilisation of time while carrying out certain objective coordinated exercises.

CRITICAL EVALUATION OF THE PROJECT

Burger and Josler (2005) Outline planning, organising, control, monitoring, and activity scheduling as an essential project flow path in project management. On the part of this project, the use of a project management methodology was a crucial step in achieving our goals. In this section, I will assess the project through the planning, control, monitoring, and closeout phases.

Planning

According to Prabhakar (2008), the planning phase of any project is targeted at defining a workable schedule to organise and guide the team in achieving the objectives of the project. Sudhakar (2012) additionally credits the use of a well-designed plan with inculcating a sense of responsibility in each team member, with the intended outcome of keeping the project objectives within the set timeframe.

We employed the MS Project in the Sodor project to help with the scheduling of project activities from start to finish. We used the Gantt chart to calculate the estimated project completion time, even if we surpassed the foreseen timeframe as a result of a misstep at the initial stage. Additionally, we used the predetermined critical path to keep track of project activities throughout their implementation cycle. This approach enabled us to bring back on track any task that had derailed. Due to imprudent utilisation of resources, we were not able to integrate overtime into the project workflow structure. Sun and Meng (2009) emphasize the uncertain nature of project implementation, with unexpected changes likely to come up during the process. Owing to the resultant random contingencies, we were unable to control the costs and as such ended up exceeding the project budget. This is in line with Latif, Baloch, and Khan’s (2011) assertion that failure to put proper budgeting procedures in place can precipitate huge challenges. The Royal Navy Aircraft Carrier Project which cost double the initially allocated amount is a good example of poor budgeting processes, with huge inconveniences arising from this error.

The planning process also involved the drafting of minutes of meetings, which outlined the activities that were to be carried out each week. Sun and Meng (2009) cite minutes-taking as an important activity as it enables project implementers to comprehend different aspects of the project such as size, deadlines and objectives. Our minutes for the Sodor Project were shared with different project stakeholders in order to convey important information regarding the aforementioned aspects of the project. In the planning phase, the team also designs a baseline project plan which indicates the activities and resource requirements for use in the project implementation phase. In view of new information arising in the course of the project, it is important to mention that the baseline changed frequently during the project implementation phase.

A risk assessment exercise- a critical tool in project management was also part of the planning process for the Sodor Project. This was crucial in determining the standards that were necessary for the successful completion of the development (Iyer & Reckers, 2008). As in the universal approach, the project involved the identification of the causes of uncertainty, the approximation of likely outcomes from these uncertainties and the initiation of a reaction to the projected outcome. Lawson (2005) defines risk assessment as a structured procedure that seeks to establish the extent and likelihood of certain outcomes in a project. For instance, with the Sodor project relying on outside suppliers for materials; it was important to establish what the consequences of the supplier failing to deliver these materials would be. The next step involved an overall assessment of the vendors to ensure that they met the required rating of the project. This was an important step in reducing the likelihood of project failure. Bent (2005) supports this view, asserting that an overall assessment is a prominent way of ensuring required project standards.

In a further effort to streamline the implementation process, we conducted an environmental impact assessment and risk assessment among a variety of other appraisal efforts. According to Kabir and Momtaz (2013), an environmental impact assessment is necessary in order to study and reduce the probable impacts of a project like Sodor on the environment. We duly conducted an environmental impact evaluation in accordance with this recommendation. Some unforeseen occurrences in this regard include oil spillage due to pipe leaks which would be catastrophic to human and animal life. The infamous BP oil spillage in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010 is an example in this case, with huge long-term implications to both human and aquatic life reported. Further considerations of private and public health policy both locally and internationally also added weight to the necessity of such an exercise (Fischer & Jha Thakur, 2013).

Monitoring and Control

Monitoring and controlling are critical activities in project implementation, with Hamza (2009) saying that they enable the project management team to stick to the initial project plan in the course of the project. Monitoring and control involve assessing the progress of the project periodically in order to enable timely response to any measured need. Many challenges were faced at the beginning of the Sodor project, particularly in regard to selecting suppliers.

Utilising the information given by the project coordinator during the session 4 peer review, an amendment was required on the project plan and cost model, in light of the fact that further subtle elements on the delivery time were adjusted, the instruction given demonstrated some slippage due to the rating of the vendors selected by the group. UmaDevi, Elango and Rajesh, (2012) in their paper cited that the decision of the right vendor is a critical choice with vast implications in the materials supply chain, arguing that the role of vendors is important in accomplishing the objectives of the project supply chain.

However, the team’s decision regarding the selection of vendor was inefficient, due to the fact that the team did not make good use of the information given by the project coordinator, UmaDevi, Elango and Rajesh, (2012) again mentioned that the wrong selection of vendor could be sufficient to tumble the project’s financial situation, which was the case in our team(5).

The role of this aspect of project management was evident in the success of the project. In line with Chan et al. (2005) argument, the monitoring and controlling process assisted the team greatly in evaluating suppliers in order to stay within the project completion timeframe. The process was not without its failures, however, with the project completion overshooting the set completion date. The Jetty design and erection faced significant challenges, and this was attributable to the selection of a poorly rated vendor. The team failed to factor in the resultant delays in the overtime draft and as a result, the delays poured over into the overall plan and quality of the project. The team also had challenges in comparing the actual progress with the baseline plan.

Project Closeout

A project requires a good closeout after the job is fully completed so as to outline lessons learnt and assess the team’s motivation during the project.  Thomas (2011) asserts that the closeout stage matters immensely because it shows whether or not the project achieves its required outcomes. In the Sodor Terminal project, the closeout involved a post-project evaluation touching on budget and completion timelines. The aim of this exercise was to assess the two of the projects’ parameters as proposed by Huang (2013); timeliness and resource utilisation. Through the post-assessment, our team was able to identify that the project had overshot the initial timeframe. With the matter now out of the team’s control, we decided to declare the project complete and consider the additional weeks, as a basis for future lessons. We prudently documented all the activities that took place throughout the project cycle in order to enhance the learning opportunity that this project afforded the group. We held a final briefing session and wrote a report that highlighted all the aspects of the project, with the inclusion of the challenges we faced and recommendations for future projects. A project closure of the plan was then conducted which resulted in a final closeout plan and baseline plan. The report indicated that the entire project had cost £11,376,876.80, which was over the budget and left with no profit. The project took 116.25 weeks longer than the set time. This was a big disappointment for the team, but we endeavoured to learn from the experiences of that project in readiness for similar challenges in the future.

Conclusion

In conclusion, this critical appraisal effort indicates that the Sodor Oil Project was implemented in accordance with the requirements of successful project management. Throughout the process, the team worked as a unit and incorporated all the requisite measures to make sure that the team was effective. Additionally, we emphasized the need for effective communication within the team and made sure that every member was well-versed in their exact role within the team.  In the planning phase, we used tools such as Ms Projects, Gantt chart and Microsoft Excel to generate cost models.  During the monitoring and control phase, various assessment exercises including were carried out. These included the environmental impact assessment, risk assessment and quality assessment. The post-assessment stage involved an appraisal of the entire project and we discovered that the project had exceeded the deadline set from 98 weeks to 116.25 weeks as well as significant excesses in the expenses. All the significant issues were recorded for future reference and the closeout was conducted to finish the project officially. Overall, we concluded that the Sodor Oil Project was well managed but the deadline was not met and the budget was overrun.

Reference List

Aritzeta, A., Swailes, S., Senior, B. (2007). ‘Belbin’s Team Role Model: Development, Validity and Applications for Team Building’, Journal of Management Studies, (44)1, pp. 96–118.

Baker, D., and Day, R., (2006). ‘Teamwork as an Essential Component of High-Reliability organization’, Journal of health service research, (41)2, pp.1-26.

BBC News, (2013). Aircraft carrier costs ‘to double’. [Online] Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24801942 [Accessed 12 Feb. 2016].

Bent, F. (2012). ‘Quality Control and Due diligence in project Management: Getting Decision Right by Taking the Outside View’, International Journal of Project Management, 5, pp. 2-35.

Burger, J., and Josler, C., (2005). ‘Project Management methodology in human resources,, Journal fall/winter 2005, (56)2, pp. 25-30.

Chan, A., Wong, F., and Lam, P (2005). ‘Assessing quality relationships in public housing: An empirical study’, International Journal of Quality &Reliability Management, (23)8, pp. 909-927.

Claessens, B., van Eerde, W., Rutte, C. and Roe, R. (2007). ‘A review of the time management literature’, Personnel Review, 36(2), pp.255-276.

Douglas, H., Bore, M. and Munro, D. (2015). Coping with University Education: The relationships of Time Management Behaviour and Work Engagement with the Five Factor Model Aspects. Learning and Individual Differences.

Fischer and Jha-Thakur (2013). ‘Environmental Assessment and Management Related Master Level Degree Programmes In The EU: Baseline, Trends, Challenges And Opportunities’, Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management. (15)4, pp.1-26.

Hamza. S, (2009). ‘Monitoring and controlling design process using control charts and process sigma’, Business Process Management Journal, (15)3, pp. 358-370.

Huang, C., (2013). ‘Shared Leadership and Team Learning: Roles of Knowledge Sharing and Team Characteristics’, The Journal of International Management Studies, (8)1, pp. 124-133.

Iyer, G., and Reckers, P., (2007). ‘CEO image, NAS and risk Assessment’, Managerial Auditing Journal, (22)9, pp. 895-912.

Kabir, M., and Momtaz, S. (2013). ‘Fifteen Years of Environmental Impact Assessment System in Bangladesh: current Practice, Challenges and Future Directions’, Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management, (15)4, pp.1-30.

Kramer, M. and Crespy, D. (2011). ‘Communicating collaborative leadership’. The Leadership Quarterly, 22(5), pp.1024-1037.

Latif, K., Baloch, Q., and Khan, M. (2011). ‘Structure, Corporate Strategy and the Overall Effectiveness of the Organisation’, Abasyn Journal of Social Sciences, (5)2, pp. 1-13.

Lawson, K. (2005). ‘Pipeline corrosion risk analysis – an assessment of deterministic and probabilistic methods’, Anti-Corrosion Methods and Materials, (52)1, pp. 3–10.

Manzoor, R. S., Ullah, H., Hussain, M., and Ahmad, M. Z. (2011). ‘Effect of Teamwork on Employee Performance’, International Journal of Learning & Development, (1)1.

Mazzei, A. and Ravazzani, S. (2011). ‘Manager‐employee communication during a crisis: the missing link’, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 16(3), pp. 243-254.

Permarupan, P., Saufi, R., Kasim, R. and Balakrishnan, B. (2013). ‘The Impact of Organizational Climate on Employee’s Work Passion and Organizational Commitment’, Procedia- Social and Behavioral Sciences, 107, pp. 88-95.

Prabhakar, G. (2008). ‘Projects and Their Management: A Literature Review’, International Journal of Business and Management, (3)8, pp. 3-8.

Ramsing, L. (2009). ‘Project communication in a strategic internal perspective’, Corporate Communications: An International Journal, 14(3), pp.345-357.

Sudhakar. G., (2012). ‘A model of critical success factors for software projects’ Journal of Enterprise Information Management, (25)6, pp. 537-558.

Sun, M., and Meng, X. (2009). ‘Taxonomy for change causes and effects in construction projects’, International Journal of Project Management, (27)6, pp. 560-572.

Thomas, H. (2011). ‘Project Closeout Process Proves Costly’, Journal of Legal Affairs and Dispute Resolution in Engineering and Construction, (3)4, pp. 178-179.

UmaDevi, K., Elango, C. and Rajesh, R. (2012). ‘VENDOR SELECTION USING AHP’, Procedia Engineering, 38, pp.1946-1949.

Van Vuuren, M., Veldkamp, B. P., de Jong, M. D. T., and Seydel, E. R. (2008). ‘Why work? Aligning foci and dimensions of commitment along the axes of the competing values framework’, Personnel Review, 37, 47-65.

Wi, H., Oh, S., Mun, J. and Jung, M. (2009). ‘A team formation model based on knowledge and collaboration’, Expert Systems with Applications, 36(5), pp. 9121-9134.

Zhu, M., Huang, Y. and Contractor, N. (2013). ‘Motivations for self-assembling into project teams’, Social Networks, 35(2), pp. 251-264.

Appendix

Baseline Plan

Closeout Plan