A Systems Approach to Planning, Scheduling, and Controlling in Corwin Corporation - Outline Example

Corwin Corporation Case Study- MisstepsMost Critical1. Faulty project selection process: The decision to undertake product development(R &D) for Peter’s project does not fit with existing conservative approach of improving existing products rather than producing new ones.2. Poor evaluation of Peter’s request: Corwin did not use its already existing policy of product selection or else it wouldn’t have accepted the proposal of profit sharing for 5 years.3. Acceptance of a contract at a fixed price: Corwin assumed majority of the financial risk by doing so.4. Ambiguous terms and conditions: Only a ‘rough draft’ of product specifications was provided by Peter’s company (Kerzner) which increased the risk of changes in costs for Corwin.5. Lack of senior management support: Had the senior management not been absent in meetings and had it detected and solved problems as they arose, the project would have been abandoned before investment by Corwin or never accepted in the first place. 6. Complacency: Corwin’s biggest problem was its complacency with its past success, which it assumed would lead to future success without changing its culture and methods to keep pace with the volatile marketplace, resulting in failure. 7. Ignorance: The management of R&D paid no heed to continued warnings from subordinates (Kerzner), which resulted in managers losing sight of what was best for the company.8. Lack of team unity: The supervisors demonstrated weak leadership by abandoning members of their team and engaged in a blame-game which led to conflict amongst the team, thereby negatively affecting project outcomes.9. Unskilled employees: The lack of skilled participants for the project jeopardized the quality of decisions made (in this case the faulty decision of accepting the project by violating cost margins in support of the client).

Intermediate1. Poor internal communication: The documentation was inadequate and data was often misinterpreted leading to confusion and the blame-game.2. Poor external communication: Internal stakeholders were not taken into confidence along with no clear guidelines as to who has authority for the project led to conflicts, confusion and lack of unanimous direction. 3. Weaknesses in corporate culture: As per Corwin’s culture, employees did not feel the need to alert their superiors in case of critical data which led to ignorance of underlying problems and ultimate failure.

Least Critical1. Delayed engagement of line managers in the process: Corwin’s line managers were unable to provide their inputs during the proposal that could have influenced it and could have given a clearer picture beforehand.2. Poor procurement decision: Corwin’s decision to procure raw materials before the contract was signed which exposed the company to financial risk in case anything went wrong prior to the contract signing.3. Poorly planned change management process: Testing process was continuously altered which led to inconsistent results and increased costs for Corwin.

Work CitedKerzner, Harold R. Project Management - A systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2013. Print.