Case study--1: Widgets R Us

Questions#1: you have been called in as a consultant to analyze the operations at WRU. What would you advise?
Answer: Widgets R Us (WRU) is a medium sized firm specializing in the design and manufacturing of quality widgets. WRU follows the functional organization design. Primarily it served well but later on could not cope with the dynamic market for several reasons. Now as a consultant I would advise to solve the problems which are as follows 1. The internal communication must be improved with the department. 2. Production cost of widget should be reduced so that it can sell the product at low price. 3. WRU can improve the quality of widget to cope with the situation. 4. Products must be supplied as early as possible. 5. Information should be opened for all so that everybody knows what happens in the organization. 6. The demand of customer might be identified and the product produced. 7. New technology can be brought to produce quality product. 8. At last I can say that, WRU Company should follow these suggestions to solve the problem.

Questions#2: what structural design changes might be undertaken to improve the operations at the company?
Answer: As WRU makes loss by following functional structure, so I can say that, the project structure might be undertaken to improve the operation at the company because the use of project structure containing several advantages which are as follows First, the project manager does not occupy a subordinate role on this structure. Second, the functional structure and its potential for siloing or communication problems are bypassed. As a result, communication improves across the organization and within the project team. Because authority remains with the project manager and the project team, Decision making is speeded up. Project decisions can occur quickly, without lengthy delays as functional groups are consulted or allowed to veto project team decisions. Third, this organization type promotes the expertise of a professional cadre of project management professionals. Finally, the pure project structure encourages flexibility and rapid response to environmental opportunities. Projects are created managed and disbanded routinely;

therefore, the ability to create new project tans as needed is common and quickly undertaken. At last I can say that, the project structure might be undertaken to improve the operation at the company.

Questions#3: what are the strengths and weaknesses of alternative solutions the company could employ?
Answer: If the company employed the project structure, the following strengths might be found 1. Authority might be assigned to only project manager. 2. It leads to improved communication across the organization and among functional groups. 3. It promoted effective and speedy decision making. 4. Promoted the creation of cadres of project management expert. 5. Encourages rapid response to market opportunities. Weaknesses of project structure If the WRU followed project structure, the following weaknesses might be faced, 1. To set up and maintain project team might be expensive. 2. Potential for project team members to develop loyalty to the project rather than to the overall organization. 3. Difficult to maintain a pooled supply of intellectual capital. 4. Concern among project team members about their future once the project ends. These are the strengths and weaknesses are found if the company employed the project structure.

Case study2: columbus instruments

Questions#1: what are the implications of CICs approach to staffing project teams? Are they using them as training grounds for talented fast-trackers or dumping grounds for poor perfumers?
Answer: CICs approach to staffing project team is basically functional organization. It collects team members from department. They provide little power to team members. They are not allowed to evaluate the performance of project teams members rather functional heads can evaluate their performance. Are they using them as training grounds for talented fast-trackers or dumping grounds for poor performers? Yes, CICs is using them as dumping grounds for poor performers.

Questions#2: how would you advise the CEO to correct the problem? Where would you start?
Answer: The following suggestions can be to the CEO to correct the problem 1. At first, the CEO should identify necessary skills for meeting the problem. 2. Then he should identify people who match the skills that are necessary for project. 3. CEO should talk to potential team members. 4. After talking with potential team members, CEO should negotiate with the functional supervisor. 5. He should clarify roles of team members. 6. CEO should adjust project schedule and budget. 7. The CEO should motivate the team members to get the best output. 8. He also should clarify methods and procedures. 9. The CEO should choice the productive and challenging team members for the project. Where would you start? I would start from identify personnel to match the skills.

Questions#3: Discuss how issues of organizational structure and power play a role in the manner in which project management has declined in effectiveness at CIC.
Answer: There are some issues of organizational structure and power play a role in the manner in which project management has declined in effectiveness at CICs are discuss in the following 1. Poorly developed goals: when the project goals are fragmented, constantly changing, or poorly communicated, the result is to infect a high degree of ambiguity into the project. This ambiguity is highly frustrating for project team members for a number of reasons. 2. Unclear goals permit multiple interpretations: the most common problem with poorly developed goals is that they allow each team members to make separate and often differing interpretations of project objectives. 3. Poorly defined project and interdependencies: team interdependencies are a state where team members activities coordinate with and complement other team members work. To some degree all team members depend on each other and must work in collaboration in order to accomplish project goals. 4. Lack of project team motivation: a common problem with poorly performing project team is a lack of motivation among team members. 5. The project is perceived as unnecessary: when projects are viewed by team members as less than critical, their motivation to perform well will naturally be affected. 6. The project may have low priority: when project team members perceive that they are working on projects of low priority, they adopt low levels of commitment to the project and have low motivation to perform well. 7. Poor communication: because of poor communication the productivity or the effectiveness are decreases. Other issues--i. Poor leadership. ii. Turnover among project team member. iii. Dysfunctional behavior. iv. Absence of a clear sense of mission. v. An unproductive interdependency. vi. Lack of cohesiveness. vii. Lack of trust. viii. Lack of enthusiasm. Finally I can say that, for the above reasons of organizational structure and power play a role in the manner in which project management has declined in effectiveness as CICs.