Pictorial Representation of Frantic Project - Essay Example

Introduction of Frantic Table of Contents Executive Summary 3 Introduction 5  Complexity factors and methodology 5 Structural Complexities 6 Technical Complexities 7 Temporal Complexities 7 Directional Complexity 8 Project Rationale/ Methodology 8 Key Risk analysis 9 Proposed methodology 10 Conclusions 13 References 15 Executive Summary Social media in today’s world has captured the interest of various companies; small or large. Friends, families, and individuals have been communicating on computer platforms for a long period. Frantic project institutes elements to be managed by teams through the project cycle. Frantic project involves a wide region. These locations have people of different languages. The other aspect of difference is their limited economic developments. The project deal with the management teams communicate visually. On the other hand, the project deals with provision of services in three governments. This means that the aspects of government’s laws and other constraints affect the project differently. Government’s laws and regulations as well as other aspects affect the project differently (Girard & Stark, 2002). The project involves the introduction of technology that features 3D aspects. Of great concern to the project is that such an idea is first in the countries. Customers in these countries have no previous records on the website. Another aspect affecting the project is the influence of stakeholders. Expectation of stakeholders has a negative impact on projects. The implications of stakeholders on the project illustrate risks. All consideration of risk factors provides a roadmap for the project team. The project of Frantic therefore involves the provision of a social media platform for their different countries. This executive summary provides details to the project. It includes all details to the project team and the management (Gransberg et al 2013). The project concentrates with a depiction of Frantic; a social media company starting operation in Mongolia, Nepal and Bhutan region. The project involves the introduction of a new technology; 3D imaging to the region. It centers of the risk involves in the project Diagram 1 The above image provides a pictorial representation of Frantic project. It illustrates that the project takes place in 3 countries. It further points out the influence of stakeholders on the project. It shows that some of the company’s stakeholders to the project include the C.E.O, policy makers, governments, regulators, local businesses, customers and media. The pictorial representation presents team influence on the project, which is a risk to the project. Another influence to the project comes from the influence of competitors to the project. Poor IT infrastructure is one of the risks affecting the project. Security policies and privacy issues is a topic of consideration as risk. Introduction It is clear from the information on Frantic. It brings forth many elements of the project. For example, the project reveals to the reader the influence of stakeholders on the project. Stakeholders of the project are important elements to its success. Their influence may affect a project positively or negatively. Some of these have the influence to affect the functioning of projects. Therefore it is important for organization‘s management teams to include all stakeholders in the project (Bailur, 2007). Stakeholders have the right to judge projects. Therefore, Frantic needs to ensure that they capture the needs of stakeholders as well as their expectations. The project involves consideration of customers using the website service to socialize. The project features the complexity of frantic. It provides an analysis on the types of complexities. It provides further in-depth information on the types of complexities. On the other hand, the project provides information on the ineffectiveness of the project (Tullio & Staples, 2013). Further tools of use for the project provide insights on the management of the project. The project concentrates on the analysis of levels of complexities the organization undergoes from the start to the end (Carr, 2014). The analysis of the project provides diverse perspective that may lead to the addition of complexities. It further provides tools that might affect the project.  Complexity factors and methodology It is imperative that before apportioning the management strategy for Frantic team to understand the root causes of the project. The project team then has to arrange the elements of the strategy to provide a methodology. The methodology is important since its adaption at every stage leads to success. Therefore, the most important aspect to the project is mapping of the complexities. Mapping is important in providing decision to the project. The process then is important in providing the bigger image of the project. It alludes to many complexities of the project. It relates to providing a link to each stage of the project. This activity allows tracking the source of such complexities. The tool used in mapping of complexities identifies different levels of complexities. It raises issues of resources to the project. The aspects of important on depicting the complexities of the project include; need to extra funds for stakeholders and Executives. It illustrates the risks involved in the in taking such decisions on the project (Remington & Pollack, 2007). There are four types of complexities in the management with Frantic Project implementations. These complexities take a structural, technical, Temporary and directional front. These complexities are able to interfere with the management of the project. Such influences might border on influencing the management of phases of the project. Structural Complexities Structural complexities influence most of huge projects. This is due to the presence of many tasks in such projects as well as interdependencies. The most challenging task is the ability of project team members to control and monitor Frantic’s interdependencies. Frantic has a huge Work breakdown structure. The project therefore has huge teams to manage activities. Since teams act in different locations, communication is essential (Remington & Pollack, 2007). These teams communicate visually saving time and other costs. Each teams to the project work under diverse contractors in different countries. The other influence is the structuring of tasks and subtasks to the project. Another influence to the project is the influence of the project schedule. The team will have a challenge in the development of a schedule. Other influences involve the natural geographical location of the countries in use (Remington & Pollack, 2007). Aspects as lack of resources due to poor infrastructure in these countries have an influence on the project to some extent. The project of Frantic structural complexity then takes a middle level. Technical Complexities Technical complexities of Frantic involve the high level of design associated with presentation of the product. The project involves provision of a social media format that provide 3D features . The provision of the features takes place in three countries with poor infrastructure and economic conditions. The new feature of the project necessitates the project team to design new modules of application. The features need to feature the needs of users of the facilities. On the other hand, Frantic needs high states of web security features. Fraud as well as other malicious activities on its web might affect Frantic reputation. Therefore, uncertainty becomes an aspect of importance to project. Uncertainty therefore leads to the prediction of future risks and thus innovation of technology (Remington & Pollack, 2007). Frantic in respect to technical complexities takes a high level. Management teams therefore need to use right tools in addressing such uncertainties. Temporal Complexities Temporal complexities relates to environmental transformations and implementation of organization strategies. Frantic understand that its environment has an influence on the team. These changes might influence the functionality of project’s teams (Gray, Larson & Desai, 2006). Therefore, the management of the team understands that domestic, government laws might affect the project. Another influence on the project is poor services as well as poor economic situations in the states. The cultures of stakeholders have an influence to some extent (Remington & Pollack, 2007). Uncertainty is another feature that influences the project. Project teams are uncertain of future web market. There has been an increase in completion of companies that provide valid challenges to Frantic. Therefore, concerning temporal complexities Frantic takes a medium level. Directional Complexity The Directional category of Frantic complexities relates to when there is no clear vision of the project. These might relate to hidden agenda or the influence of politics. This information might affect the functions of teams in projects. Such influence leads to conflicts, which leads to failures. Stakeholders from different countries face challenges related to goal and vision influences. Culture and language are other areas of importance to the project. Such influences may affect the vision of the organization (Remington & Pollack, 2007). Project teams further might have diverse agenda related to the project. Their influences might change the interest of the project leading to ambiguity. Such influence leads to misunderstanding of project’s activities thus the delivery. Frantic has a medium level of directional complexity (Maylor, Vidgen & Carver, 2008). Project Rationale/ Methodology Business communication educators need to ensure that students develop digital skills to meet market expectations of today’s world. Business organizations need to provide social media services that meet expectations of customers. Frantic project values diverse complexities. The complexity to the project may be categorized as business risk. Therefore, the project’s C.E.O needs to consider these different complexities. Teams to the project then need to be effective in monitoring various influences, from the initiation stage to the completion stage (Senescu, Aranda-Mena, & Haymaker, 2013). The rationale of the project, therefore, borders on the categorization of different complexities of the project. In relation to this, the first step to the project relates to the mapping of the project. Mapping of the project involves the development of various decision viewpoints. The mapping phase provides links to the project (Wilson et al, 2011).. The tools to the project ensures mapping of various complexities. The various structures of Frantic provide answers to technical, structural, temporal, and directional problems. On the other hand, risks analysis need to be core in the project. Therefore, it is the function of the project C.E.O to limit various project risks. The project manager might use effective management strategies; use various technologies or teams in overcoming complexities to the project. Diagram 2 Key Risk analysis The various elements that act as Risk for Frantic project include poor infrastructure. The other aspects include uncertainty, scope, budget, time, and changes in government. The project faces the risk of number of interdependencies of the project (Senescu, Aranda-Mena, & Haymaker, 2013) Since the project is huge, there is a huge risk of interdependencies. Risk of political influence is an essential aspect of the project. The other influence comes dues to lack of support from the management team (Wilson et al, 2011).  These are just but few risk influences of the project. Therefore, organizations need to develop various strategies in limiting such risks (Thamhain, 2013). Frantic project focuses on these aspects through the management of various ineffective management perspectives. Diagram 3 Proposed methodology Ineffective Project management In order to meet the influences created by technical, directional as well as mapping in Nepal, Bhutan and Mongolia region, the organization uses Stanislavski’s Method tool. Directional complexity for the project might relate to the consistency in the understanding of main goals. Visions that unclear interfere with the participation of teams. Ineffective management influence that affects projects relates to the lack of experts. Poor team management is another factor that influences projects. Since the organization operates in 3 countries that include Mongolia, Nepal and Bhutan, teams need to be effective. This team instrumental in the accomplishment of the project, need to be cooperative. The tool is important in the understanding of different perspectives of the organization. The tool is an important feature for the organization since it assists in the understanding of company’s mission, vision and people (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010). The understanding of people’s assists in the management of teams. On the other hand, the tool is essential in the improvement of communication in organizations. Security issues arise from the Technical complexity in the project. Such complexities might include insecure personal data of users. It also includes influences arising from cybercrime and hackers. If the organization is not able to control security issues of the project, it is apparent it leads to ineffective management (Liechty, 1995). The system anatomy tools are important in the maintenance of security within the media. The tool works by discovering problems in the system. On the other hand, the security tool assists in the testing of security issues of the social media project. It acts by conducting checks on the system; provide tests and solutions (Wilson et al, 2011). On the other hand, project team uses the application to rank future risk features. Frantic uses this tool to manage its systems. The security system ensures that the project does not suffer from hacking. Such measures ensure that details of customer do not leak to the public (Kane et al, 2014) Quality is another aspect of importance to the project. Low software quality has an influence on the project. Therefore, quality management is an important aspect on every project. Frantic will be instrumental in providing new features for the web. Therefore, complexities might arise from the designing phase. There might be lack of technical knowledge in providing 3D imaging features. IT knowledgeable experts might not be present in these countries to handle the new feature (Lyon, 2003). Another influence to the project includes the absence of quality control mechanism. There is need to have individuals with social media system management capabilities. Misunderstanding is another feature of importance. Weak management of the system led to inefficient projects. On the hand, it is true that some stakeholders may force projects to faster completion leading to mistakes. Kokotovich Triad tool provides answers to low quality software (Remington & Pollack, 2007). The tool is effective in branching from mind mapping. It uses a mind- mapping system of software. The software is essential in exploration of interrelationships between groups. The tool ends with finding the appropriate answer to the problem. Frantic wishes to maintain high quality of services they offer customers. Therefore, it is part of the management of the project to use the quality tool. Projects face political issues as well as other influences in these countries. The governing regulations in these countries also influence project team differently. On the other lack of governance might arise from undefined goals (Lyon, 2003). The goals might lead to ambiguity thus failure of the project. Bureaucracy might influence projects to a huge extent. Stakeholders are further a cause of many project failures. Discursive Universe Tool is a tool that ensures communication within the project (Remington & Pollack, 2007). The tool is essential in ensuring communication between various levels of stakeholders. The front ensures that customers communicate with friends effectively. The tool, therefore, ensures engagement of various stakeholders to the project (Lyon, 2003). In order to limit future influences of the project risks the organization needs to be proactive in their endeavors. Discursive Universe tool is suitable for situations that need sharing of diverse agreements. The agreements are instrumental in propelling projects to higher levels. The tool makes project team understand the natural aspects that affect the region (Lyon, 2003). The organization moreover has understanding with stakeholders. These agreements show the implication of Discursive Universe Tool. The influence touches stockholders. Conclusions Social media has had an influence on todays world communication networks. To answer this in Nepal, Mongolia and Bhutan region, Frantic provides an effective communication system. The country o operation for the project entails the observation of different languages and cultures. The project moves above its competitors b providing 3D imaging; first in the region. Since the project has new features, there is a possibility of it facing challenges. The countries of operation might not have specialized individuals to handle 3D imaging. Other negative influences that act as risk to the project include the influence of stakeholders, regulatory bodies and governments. In response to these influences, it is imperative to note that the project faces diverse complexities. The complexities to the project take a structural, directional, technical as well temporal front. Project management team influences is another aspect that might be a risk to the project. Teams might lead to ineffective management of projects. To limit this influences, Frantic project use diverse tools. These tools provide answers to quality, security as well as other issues. Tools further are important in the management of stakeholders influence on the project. The tools in operation include Discursive Universal tool, Stanislavskis and the Kokotovich Triad tool. References Bailur, S. (2007). The complexities of community participation in ICT for development projects: The case of “Our Voices”. In Proceedings of 9th International Conference on Social Implications of Computers in Developing Countries, 83 (8), 20-25. Carr, A. (2014). Facebook Everywhere. Fast Company, (187), 56-92. Di Tullio, D., & Staples, D. (2013). The Governance and Control of Open Source Software Projects. Journal Of Management Information Systems, 30(3), 49-80. Girard, M., & Stark, D. (2002). Distributing intelligence and organizing diversity in new media projects. Sociedade e estado, 17(1), 153-192. Gray, C. F., Larson, E. W., & Desai, G. V. (2006). Project management. The managerial process. 11(2), 133-182 Kane, G. C., Alavi, M., Labianca, G., & Borgatti, S. P. (2014). Whats Different About Social Media Networks? A Framework And Research Agenda. MIS Quarterly, 38(1), 275-304. Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media. Business horizons, 53(1), 59-68. Liechty, M. (1995). Media, markets, and modernization: Youth identities and the experience of modernity in Kathmandu, Nepal. Youth cultures: A cross-cultural perspective, 166-201. Lyon, D. (Ed.). (2003). Surveillance as social sorting: Privacy, risk, and digital discrimination. Sussex: Psychology Press. Maylor, H., Vidgen, R., & Carver, S. (2008). Managerial complexity in project‐based operations: A grounded model and its implications for practice. Project Management Journal, 39(S1), S15-S26. Remington, K., & Pollack, J. (2007). Tools for complex projects. London:Gower Publishing, Ltd. Street, B. V. (Ed.). (2001). Literacy and development: Ethnographic perspectives. New York: Psychology Press. Thamhain, H. (2013). Managing Risks in Complex Projects. Project Management Journal, 44(2), 20-35. Wilson, H. J., Guinan, P. J., Parise, S., & Weinberg, B. D. (2011). What’s your social media strategy. Harvard Business Review, 89(7/8), 23-25. Gransberg, D. D., Shane, J. S., Strong, K., & del Puerto, C. (2013). Project Complexity Mapping in Five Dimensions for Complex Transportation Projects. Journal Of Management In Engineering, 29(4), 316-326. Senescu, R., Aranda-Mena, G., & Haymaker, J. (2013). Relationships between Project Complexity and Communication. Journal Of Management In Engineering, 29(2), 183-197. Read More