Paraphrase

Paraphrase
Abstract The case is about design prototypes Inc. in this case Raef Conley is employed and plays a role as a project manager to lead his first big project called Alpha C360. After the selection process and the project teams are formed, as the planning stage start Raef propose the Work Breakdown Structure and calculates the Critical Path. However, after analysing the Critical Path it was observed that the WBS did not meet the 18 months timeline. Moreover, team has made up the new version of WBS and the case analysis will clear out if the revised version of WBS is feasible with Critical path analysis. Introduction An effective project management is one in which the project manager and the project team dive deep to bring success to the project. It is not possible with a hardworking team. The planning phase is considered the most important phase of project management as it creates a pathway for the tasks and activities and of course its success. However, Work breakdown Structure has a significant role which is break down the tasks and the activities of the project in simple components. After, WBS critical path of the project is calculated which helps to identify the completion date of the project. The case below will discuss and look into the critical path analysis of Alpha C360 project. Also, going through the revised version of WBS as it will clear whether the project is possible of completing the project on time which is in 18 months. Also, there will be some important takeaways for Raef which will be mentioned on what information he should take for his next presentation to the management. Critical Path Analysis What is critical path? It is a network diagram which shows the path with the longest duration is called critical path. It is the arrangement of the activities related to the project which determine the possible time of the completion of the project. Any task during the project delays, it automatically delays the project. When the WBS is developed, it has the tasks and the activities performed by the team broken into simple components and it helps in generating the critical path for the project (According to Class presentation). Moreover, moving to the case of Design prototypes Inc., Raef Conley is the project manager for this case and had WBS with the seven members of project team for Alpha C360. The EBS pointed toward giving the breakdown of the project to the team with the explanation, task time/days and priority connections. However, Raef presented the critical path analysis but the results of it were not feasible. The project is supposed to be completed in 18 months (547.5days), in fact the analysis showed 578 days which calculated 1 more month and the project exceeded 1month. Now, the team meeting was held and they came up by giving approximately equal amount of time and WBS was revised. For instance, Testing was reduced to 92 to 82 days and more. Result of Critical Path Activity  Early Start Early Finish  Latest Start Latest Finish Slack 60 449 509 429 80 429 509 429 80 86 509 515 14 14 22 14 34 36 56 20 46 20 66 14 66 14 66 22 34 44 56 66 66 72 66 72 72 154 72 154 154 184 154 184 184 194 184 194 194 289 194 289 289 314 289 314 314 354 314 354 354 404 354 404 404 489 404 489 489 509 489 509 509 515 509 515 Project Completion Time= 515 The above, critical path signifies the activity, early start, early finish, latest start, latest finished and slack time. This shows, WBS the revised version worked very well. Now, the revised project completion time is 515 days which is around 16.93 or 17 months approximately. Result Analysis of Revised Critical Path The first critical path analysis of Alpha C360 project identify that the project will be completed in 19 months which is 578 days, but the final project completion date is in 18 months. This clearly shows that their analysis shows 1 month more than the actual completion date. After, revising the WBS the completion days and time was 17 months approximately which is 515 days, as given 18 months is the final project date so it is possible to complete the project in 17 months. As the team discussed and decreased the time in some of the activities, it resulted in timely completion of the project and more than that before the timeline which is quite effective for the project and company reputation. Information Included by Raef in Presentation Raef is an effective project manager who is calm and patient. He took opinions of every individual in the interviews. Also, he was passionate and futuristic about the project. Not only this, but he also made sure that every team member contributed to the revision of the new WBS. Now as the completion time of the project has decreased and within the time period, he should first motivate and appreciate the team members in the presentation on completing the first milestone. He should take the revised critical path analysis along with the Gantt chart to present in front of other team members. He should take the important guidelines with him to meet the activities mentioned in the WBS as usually, the team gets in trouble focusing on the accurate critical path for the project (Jones, 2008). Conclusion To conclude, the Design Prototypes Inc. had a new project manager, Raef Conley who was responsible for a new project Alpha C360. This project has to be completed within 18 months time period. For this project he made a team of 7 members. The project manager put forward a Work Breakdown Structure for the project in which the tasks were broken into small components. Then the Critical Path Analysis was created which showed the time frame of 578 days in the completion of the project which was 30 days more than it should be. So, a new WBS was created which was revised by all team members and the task of the case was to make and analyze revised critical path which came to 515 days and approximately 17 months which is feasible for the project. References Jones, C. (2008, October 19). Moving from the WBS to a critical path schedule. Retrieved from Project Management Institute: https://www.pmi.org/learning/library/moving-work-breakdown-structure-critical-path-6978 LaPoint, P., & Haggard, C. (2014). Design Prototypes Inc project management (B): Planning the Alpha C306 Project. CaseCentre. Retrieved from https://www.thecasecentre.org/main/products/view?id=156286