Page 94 - DCAP304_DCAP515_SOFTWARE_PROJECT_MANAGEMENT
P. 94

Software Project Management




                    Notes            More Things Happen!
                                     Ongoing events affect your final productivity.
                                         Hortence is sick and cannot complete her assigned tasks her productivity goes from
                                          “Best” to “Adequate”, or from “Adequate” to “Poor” depending on the task she has
                                          been assigned.
                                     DO NOT make any additional changes to the table.  Copy your previous results onto the
                                     new table and calculate your point score.
                                     Final Productivity

                                    Name     Person   Scope 1   Scope 2  Scope 3   Scope 4   Scope 5   Ongoing  Ongoing
                                                                                             Lab Work  Lab Work
                                                                                             1        2
                                    Chia-Ling  Graduate  Poor   Best   Adequate   Poor   Poor   Adequate  Best
                                             student   1 Point   3 Points  2 Points   1 Point   1 Point   2 Points   3 Points
                                    Suzanne   Post-doc   Poor   Poor   Best   Poor   Adequate  Adequate  Best
                                                     1 Point   1 Point   3 Points   1 Point   2 Points   2 Points   3 Points
                                    Hortence   Post-doc   Adequate  Poor   Poor   Adequate  Poor   Adequate  Poor
                                    (sick)           2 Points   1 Point   1 Point   2 Points   1 Point   2 Points   1 Point
                                    Pradip   Post-doc   Adequate  Best   Adequate  Poor   Best   Best   Adequate
                                                     2 Points   3 Points  2 Points   1 Point   3 Points   3 Points   2 Points

                                     Examine the table above.  Using the columns, copy the check boxes of the scope projects
                                     and personnel you used from the previous table.  Record the points you received for each
                                     project at the bottom.  If you chose a project and at least one of the personnel you placed on
                                     the project had a “Best” score it as 3 points.  If the personnel had “Adequate” score it as 2
                                     points.  Add up your points and place the  sum in the “TOTAL POINTS” Box.  If the
                                     personnel had “Poor” score it as 1 point.  If you switched any projects between table one
                                     and table 2 (i.e. after the misfortune) subtract 2 points from your total.

                                         Total Points
                                         Subtract 2 Points If You Changes Scopes
                                         Final Points

                                     Final Point Scoring:
                                          Final Points                               Outcome
                                          10-12                           Excellent- Kept current lab funding and
                                                                          added new grant
                                          8-9                             Good-Kept current lab funding
                                          0-7                             Poor – Too high risk, lost all lab funding

                                     The goal of this case study is not to win, but to see how ongoing events can affect your
                                     laboratory, and how project management can help you control your resources for your
                                     benefit.  Key things to consider as you analyze your projects.

                                         After the initial things went wrong, how did you reallocate your resources?
                                         How much risk were you willing to take?  If you lost a scope project, did you refocus
                                          on protecting the current lab funding?  Were you willing to risk your current lab
                                          funding to get more funding?
                                         What would you do differently next time?
                                     This case study was developed by Milton Datta, M.D., Emory University, for the session
                                     on project planning at the 2005 BWF-HHMI Course in Scientific Management



          88                                LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY
   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99