2 paragraph and 3 questions<-------CASE is attached!!!!!! READ THE CASE <------

 

———–>A well written 2 paragraph summary of ARTICLE 

 

Discussion Questions

 

1. Assess the risks of this project. Given your assessment of the project complexity,

clarity, and size, what management strategies would you recommend? What, if any, of

these strategies were adopted in this project? 2 PARAGRAPH RESPONSE

  

2. Describe the development methodology that was applied to this project. Was this the

most appropriate approach? Provide a rationale for your response. 2 PARAGRAPH RESPONSE

  

3. When a project is outsourced, who should manage the project — the internal group or

 

the outsourcer? Why? 2 PARAGRAPH RESPONSE

 

—–>INCLUDE APA FORMAT REFFERENCES OF WORK BELOW<------------

3 2 2 Chapter 10 Managing IT Projects

Discussion Questions

XX&^ZLXZtiZtt”” ( r a ? d – *- * **• M

Hi

DEALING WITH TRAFFIC JAMS IN LONDON

of previous centuries I ^ ^ ^ w * ^ * * * ^ W d r a ™ Cages’
congestion nightmare a mafe o ? l t W T ^ ” ^ ° ^ W 3 S * i s

mental and economic problems as w e l f i ? T ‘ *_ * c o n t r i b u t e d *> both environ-
businesses roughly £2 S^^t^iZT^ P r a b I e m s « * London
aggressive pohcv to address this • – T I T , muuon—every week Clearly, the city needed an

and endorsed by incoming Mavor KJ^ T ! 7 G r 6 a t e r L o n d o n Authority Ad
suggests, the city w ” a s l ^ T f e e or W a S C 0 ” g * As the name
secfons of London d u r t ^ e i h o u . ^ t 0 ^ a U t ° m ° b i l e * * e n t e r e d

about 150 000 of tie*bvvZt» L ° n d o n ^ h e r e ™ g % 1 million people entered every day,
this area b e l l l ^ ^ l m T d f & 2 ° ° 3 ‘ ^ w h o ^
vehicles, such as a m b u W s Lses f n d 1 , ° * ” ° f h y ( C e r f a i n ^ » o f

charge by mail ( p r e S ^ ‘ ! , ? ‘ f ? ‘ ^ D r i v e i s h a v e *e option ofpayingme
p a y t t f e ^ e t ^
current technologies The X T f i J f ^ S f D l f i c a i l % solution makes extensive use of
d e s i g n a t e ^ 7 0 0 C a m e r a s – ^ r e than 200 sites in the
enterthe area T t w r i m ta r cameras photograph the license plates of every vehicle that
images W l _ W ^ T T ^ P t 0 * *** C 8 n t e * * t r m s l a t e s ^ photographic

To create and im
pn»j«-< t risks:

• Tight Schedule:
multiple statutory

. Technology: The
of thousands of li

t ,ack of Pre-existi
• Limited Experien

governmental age
were experienced

‘ • Political Fallout: ‘
be extremely dan

Transport for Lo
limit the risks result
the most significant
specialized in diesi
contracted first with

Early in tlie proje
project into five “ps
included (1) tlie ca
converted them int
when one vehicle -\
between the earners
including tlie ability
kiosks and gas static

The retail side w
further reduce the ri
packages. Another r.
process of identifyin
rejected proposals to
in scenarios such as t
increased ridership.

Transport for Lor
project was large e
Companies through
tendered for tlie ca
receive bids on a coi
before deciding on a
Group, England’s

1

Capita’s bid, Deloitt
design studies. In ad
established deadline

After awarding th
it kept additions to tl:
aproject increases in
ofthe few changes a< popular SMS text m

[> Chapter 10 Managing IT Projects

ission Questions

hat type of development methodology appears to have been, employed at Southern
.mpany for the ECM project? Was this a good approach? Provide a rationale for your
sponse.
escribe how Traynor could have applied Lewin’s three stage model of change in
lplementing the ECM? What would have been the advantages of applying Lewin’s three-
age model?
ssess Southern’s ECM system on fhe four dimensions of project success? How successful do
m think this project is?

:es: Southern Company Web site, www.southemcompany.com (accessed on April 18, 2012); and
‘erby, “How Southern Company Revamped I T Change Management,” CIO.com (October IS, 2010),
/www.do.conVar_cle/print/626323.

\LING WITH TRAFFIC JAMS IN LONDON

.ondon entered the 21st century, it was confronted with a major issue that plagues many cities
mghout the world—excessive automobile traffic. Many Londoners—and particularly fhe
iness commvrnity—rated traffic congestion as the city’s most serious problem. At peak periods,
average speed was less than 10 miles per hour, a slower speed than the horse-drawn carriages
irevious centuries. Drivers spent about half their time waiting in traffic. Not only was this
gestion nightmare a major source of driver frustration, but it contributed to both environ-
ital and economic problems as well. By one estimate, traffic-related problems cost London
inesses roughly £2 milhon—more than $3 million—every week. Clearly, the city needed an
ressive policy to address this issue. The solution, proposed by a government study titled Road
jrging Options for London (ROCOL), authorized by the 1999 Greater London Authority Act,
L endorsed by mcoming Mayor Ken Livingstone, was congestion charging. As the name
gests, the city would assess, a fee, or charge, to every automobile that entered high-traffic
tions of London during peak hours.
Rather than attempt a broad citywide implementation, the government focused specifically on
highly congested section of central London, where roughly 1 mfilion people entered every day,

)ut 150,000 of them by private automobile. Beginning in February 2003, drivers who entered
5 area between 7 AM and 6:30 PM had to pay a fee of £5 ($8) by midnight. (Certain types of
ricles, such as ambulances, buses, and taxis, were exempt.) Drivers have the option of paying the
urge by mail (prepay), text messaging, telephone, or in person at various pay points. Failure to
f the fee results in a fine of £80 (roughly $130). Significandy, this solution makes extensive use of
rrent technologies. The city installed almost 700 cameras at more than 200 sites in the
signated high-traffic area. These cameras photograph the license plates of every vehicle that
ters the area. They then transmit these photos to a data center that translates the photographic
Aims into license plate numbers utilizing automatic number plate recognition technology.

Case Study 10-2

To create and implement the congestion charge plan, the government had to face a number of
project risks:

• Tight Schedule: The project needed to be completed under tight deadlines in order to meet
multiple statutory requirements and minimize disruptions to commuters.

• Technology: The cameras had to be strategically placed in order to accurately photograph tens
of thousands of license plates every day.

• Lack of Pre-existing Models: There were no pre-existing models in the world to follow.

• Limited Experience and Expertise: Mayor Hvhigstone was newly elected, and the supervising
governmental agency—Transport for London—had only recently been created. Thus, neither
were experienced in bunding such a system.

• Political Fallout: The political risk of a system failure to the new mayor was so huge that it would
be extremely damaging to his career.

Transport for London adopted a series of management strategies to navigate these waters and
Emit .the risks resulting from their limited experience, IT ability, and management time. Perhaps
the most significant decision was to outsource fhe basic management activities to firms that
specialized in these areas. For example, to manage the competitive bidding process they
contracted first with PricewaterhouseCoopers and then with Deloitte & Touche.

Early in fhe project, project managers identified fhe critical technical elements and divided the
project into five “packages” that could, i f required, be bought and managed’ separately. These
included (1) the camera component; (2) the image store component that collected images,
converted them into license numbers, and condensed the images (duplicates would occur
when one vehicle was photographed by several cameras); (3) the telecommunications links
between fhe cameras and the image store component; (4) the customer services irrfrastructure,
mcluding the ability to pay by phone, Web, ‘and mail; and (5) an extensive network of retail outlet
kiosks and gas stations where people could pay the toll.

The retail side was seen as a big enough risk that it was bought and managed separately. To
further reduce the risks, it was decided to select the best available technologies for each of the five
packages. Another risk-aversive move was to utilize only established technologies for the actual
process of identifying the vehicles in the designated zone. For example, Transport for London
rejected proposals to employ electronic tags because this technology had not been proved effective
in scenarios such as this one. Finally, the city added roughly 200 buses to its fleet to accommodate
increased ridership.

Transport for London requestedbids on the project early in 2001. The estimated $116.2 million
project was large enough to require listing in the European Union’s public-sector register.
Companies throughout Europe were allowed to bid on the project. Separate bids could be
tendered for the camera and communications packages, whereas the remaining three could
receive bids on a combined basis or individually. Deloitte & Touche reviewed more than 40 bids
before deciding on a single contractor, to manage the entire program. Their choice was The Capita
Group, England’s largest business process outsourcing firm. Significantly, before accepting
Capita’s bid, Deloitte required both that firm and fhe other final candidate to submit technical
design studies. In addition, Capita’s contract included penalties i f the company failed to meet fhe
established deadlines.

After awarding the contract to Capita, Deloitte closely monitored every step ofthe process, and
it kept additions to the original plan to a minimum. As a result, scope creep—fhe process whereby
a project increases in both size and costs as new features are added—was never a serious issue. One
ofthe few changes added to the requirements was an option for motorists to pay fees through the

3 2 4 f> Chapter 10 Managing IT Projects

Throughout the implementation ofthe new system, the city continually so„al • r ‘ **
key stalceho ders. In addition, it regularly updated the pubhc JS^^AX”***

, Consequendy, few drivers were caught unawares when the new n n l w P J ” ‘ l ‘ s 4ti«>«
February 17, 2003. The mayor also wtsely decided to b^Zitl ^ “”” ‘
period, when traffic volumes are ^ ^ . ^ f f ^ 1 ^ ^
dnvers generally had adapted to the new procedures returned I ^

What were the results of these concerted efforts? Unlike so many systems oroi. r ,
congestion charging plan was completed on time and within budget SfcXtivT °n*”*
demanding schedule did not compromise the quality of the work I n s t 3 N h
appears to have achieved its basic goals. A follow-up study indicated that traffic m cent’ fT***
had dimmished by as much as 20%, and average driving speeds had improv d T l i ‘• ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ ” * *
resulted m a project payback penod of about one and a half years. I t was estilna I ‘ I I ‘ ‘ ‘ FA

revenues would amount to $2.2 billion over a ten-year period. L r e o v e i v ^ X ! ^
tone substances such as nitrogen dioxide were also reduced. One potenti J n r o H , ! o f

emerge was “rat runs” in which traffic jams would appear in * £ ^ £ ^ U ‘ ‘ c l «
altezed their routes to avoid the charges. After reviewing the outcomes of L w ”

z » *r0T
d ftat congesaon w i b—* ^ t e i x

Discussion Questions

1. Assess the risks of this project. Given your assessment ofthe project complexity , ! „ • ,
size, what management strategies would you recommend? What i f s n y r f £ ‘ f V
were adopted in this project? y’ s t ‘•”•Hugies

2. Describe the development methodology that was apphed to this project Was this l l , , .
appropnate approach? Provide a rationale for your response

3 ” o l t r c e ^ y ? ° U t S ° U r C e d ‘ — g e ^ ” SO”.. – the

End Congestion,” (January 27, 2003), AutLoUve N^^^^^^T^ ^ ” f ” ‘ T f°

Traffic Woes” (July 15 2003) C^IO MlV ^T V ^ H°W IT Fked ‘ , W i
2 0 5 9 4 3 0 5 0 / f u f l ^

1

K N 0 W L
MANAG
INTELLI
ANALYT

Business intelligence
for those firms who
provides an overviev
begins by differentia
analytics, mcluding a
edge (both tacit and < of making better de_ which are outlined n follows. The chapter business analytics anc a discussion of social

C:i<"> irs Entertainment I
measures, found a way t
(Jiislomer data. Accordir
win s by mining our custo
results to implement fine
customers coming back,
customer activity and re\
at close to $3 billion. W
valued at $17 billion. :
widespread use of bush
ilie company changed i t

Analytics at Caesars
Kevvards (TR) program.

‘ Gary Loveman, “Diamonds ir