Scribd
Upload
149 views1 page

Project Management Simulation

This document summarizes three scenarios from a project management simulation. In Scenario A, the project was completed on time but exceeded the timeline by 25%. In Scenario C, the timeline was shortened unexpectedly, forcing the hiring of more laborers but completion still went past the deadline and over budget by 52%. Key lessons learned include maintaining team morale through status meetings and 1:1 sessions, adjusting staffing levels appropriately over time, avoiding frequent changes to team structures, and setting realistic targets and timelines. Prototyping and considering worker expertise can also impact productivity and morale.

Uploaded by

ankit bhaskar
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
149 views1 page

Project Management Simulation

This document summarizes three scenarios from a project management simulation. In Scenario A, the project was completed on time but exceeded the timeline by 25%. In Scenario C, the timeline was shortened unexpectedly, forcing the hiring of more laborers but completion still went past the deadline and over budget by 52%. Key lessons learned include maintaining team morale through status meetings and 1:1 sessions, adjusting staffing levels appropriately over time, avoiding frequent changes to team structures, and setting realistic targets and timelines. Prototyping and considering worker expertise can also impact productivity and morale.

Uploaded by

ankit bhaskar
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Project Management Simulation

Scenario A: This was a simple project corresponding to a product development and manufacturing, with
no surprises, and expected us to manage labour and their morale, resources and schedule. We were able to
complete level 3 product but exceeded timeline set by 25%.
Q. What went right?
1: The score of 672 is mainly benefited by the fact that we got additions from project scope, completing
level 3 product. 2: I believe that we were able to maintain the work close to the allotted budget exceeding
7% from the management target. We maintained a constant underbudget with high productivity in starting
of the schedule.
Q. What went wrong?

1: I was not able to maintain team morale. It was required to time 1 to 1 session and status meeting
properly, often it got over exhaustive or insufficient. I got notification from the system to perturbate few
times. 2: We should have hired more employees around week 10 as we were under budget and behind
schedule. This could have benefited us to complete project in time. 3: the team settings should not be
changed very frequently as the team mood improves if workers work together for long. I noticed this in
around week 13 when I did not change much, the team morale got right from over-stressed in 3
continuous round and the productivity was close to target.
Scenario C: This scenario got us an element of surprise with time for completion shortened to 12 weeks.
This forced me employee more labour but could complete the work only by week 16. We went
excessively overbudget (52%).
Q What went right?

1. The team morale was very good with customized meeting. 2: The team members coordinated well and
little incident were there of them being in dark. They initially showed confusion but with standups, 1 on
1, they came across.
Q What went wrong?

1. Budget could not be maintained to match the schedule. I realised that just hiring more employees
impacts productivity. I was able to do the work done faster from round 5 when I increased number of
workers but the work done was not at par with increase in cost. Efficiency should be the target. 2: I was
behind schedule and missed to maintain team morale at around week 3 which impacted task completion
for subsequent weeks. 3: Even when the management target changed, I did not change my target. This
gave wrong hopes to workers which probably impacted speed of tasks but did help in team morale. 4:
Prototyping was not done it left the workers confused in the later part.
Extra Learnings:- 1: While it did help in boosting morale, setting easy targets doesn’t improve
productivity. On the other side setting tough targets decreased morale and impacted productivity
indirectly. It is common to increase meetings and 1 to 1 sessions when team coordination fails but we
should do slowly as I witnessed team morale improving by doing nothing and just waiting in week 13+
and week 5+ of scenario A and C respectively. This suggests teams take time to adjust. 2: In the later
weeks meeting should be avoided as it irritates the worker more than it helps. We should also look into
expertise of the workers. The high skilled workers demanded less meeting and 1 to 1 sessions which I
realised only later.

You might also like