PART I

Case B: Wynn Computer Equipment (WCE)

In 1965, Joseph Wynn began building computer equipment in a small garage behind his house.
By 2002, WCE was a $1 billion a year manufacturing organization employing 900 people. The
major success found by WCE has been attributed to the nondegreed workers who have stayed
with WCE over the past fifteen years. The nondegreed personnel account for 80 percent of the
organization. Both the salary structure and fringe benefit packages are well above the industry
average.

CEO PRESENTATION
In February 2002, the new vice president and general manager made a presentation to his
executive staff outlining the strategies he wished to see implemented to improve productivity:
Our objective for the next twelve months is to initiate a planning system with the focus on
strategic, developmental, and operational plans that will assure continued success of WCE
and support for our broad objectives. Our strategy is a four-step process:
 To better clarify expectations and responsibility
 To establish cross-functional goals and objectives
 To provide feedback and performance results to all employees in each level of
management
 To develop participation through teamwork
The senior staff will merely act as a catalyst in developing long and short-term
objectives. Furthermore, the senior staff will participate and provide direction and
leadership in formulating an integrated manufacturing strategy that is both technology-
and human-resources-driven. The final result should be an integrated project plan that
will:
 Push decision making down
 Trust the decision of peers and people in each organization
 Eliminate committee decisions
Emphasis should be on communications that will build and convey ownership in the
organization and a we approach to surfacing issues and solving problems.
In April 2002, a team of consultants interviewed a cross section of Wynn personnel to determine
the “pulse” of the organization. The following information was provided:
 “We have a terrible problem in telling our personnel (both project and functional)
exactly what is expected on the project. It is embarrassing to say that we are a
computer manufacturer and we do not have any computerized planning and
control tools.”
 “Our functional groups are very poor planners. We, in the project office, must do
the planning for them. They appear to have more confidence in and pay more
attention to our project office schedules than to their own.”
 “We have recently purchased a $65,000 computerized package for planning and
controlling. It is going to take us quite a while to educate our people. In order to
interface with the computer package, we must use a work breakdown structure.
This is an entirely new concept for our people.”
  “We have a lack of team spirit in the organization. I’m not sure if it is simply the
result of poor communications. I think it goes further than that. Our priorities get
shifted on a weekly basis, and this produces a demoralizing effect. As a result, we
cannot get our people to live up to either their old or new commitments.”
 “We have a very strong mix of degreed and nondegreed personnel. All new,
degreed personnel must ‘prove’ themselves before being officially accepted by
the nondegreed personnel. We seem to be splitting the organization down the
middle. Technology has become more important than loyalty and tradition and, as
a result, the nondegreed personnel, who believe themselves to be the backbone of
the organization, now feel cheated. What is a proper balance between experience
and new blood?” “The emphasis on education shifts with each new executive. Our
nondegreed personnel obviously are paying the price. I wish I knew what
direction the storm is coming from.”
 “My department does not have a database to use for estimating. Therefore, we
have to rely heavily on the project office for good estimating. Anyway, the project
office never gives us sufficient time for good estimating so we have to ask other
groups to do our scheduling for us.”
 “As line manager, I am caught between the rock and the hard spot. Quite often, I
have to act as the project manager and line manager at the same time. When I act
as the project manager I have trouble spending enough time with my people. In
addition, my duties also include supervising outside vendors at the same time.”
 “My departmental personnel have a continuous time management problem
because they are never full-time on any one project, and all of our projects never
have 100 percent of the resources they need. How can our people ever claim
ownership?”
 “We have trouble in conducting up-front feasibility studies to see if we have a
viable product. Our manufacturing personnel have poor interfacing with advanced
design.”
 “If we accept full project management, I’m not sure where the project managers
should report. Should we have one group of project managers for new
processes/products and a second group for continuous (or old)
processes/products? Can both groups report to the same person?”
Guiding questions
1. What are the problems at WCE? Identify at least 5 problems
2. What appears to be the major problem?
3. Can line manager effectively wear two hats?
4. Should there be two groups of line managers?

PART II

PART II
Case Two A: Macon, Inc.
Macon was a fifty-year-old company in the business of developing test equipment for the tire
industry. The company had a history of segregated departments with very focused functional line
managers. The company had two major technical departments: mechanical engineering and
electrical engineering. Both departments reported to a vice president for engineering, whose
background was always mechanical engineering. For this reason, the company focused all
projects from a mechanical engineering perspective. The significance of the test equipment’s
electrical control system was often minimized when, in reality, the electrical control systems
were what made Macon’s equipment outperform that of the competition.
Because of the strong autonomy of the departments, internal competition existed. Line managers
were frequently competing with one another rather than focusing on the best interest of Macon.
Each would hope the other would be the cause for project delays instead of working together to
avoid project delays altogether. Once dates slipped, fingers were pointed and the problem would
worsen over time. One of Macon’s customers had a service department that always blamed
engineering for all of their problems. If the machine was not assembled correctly, it was
engineering’s fault for not documenting it clearly enough. If a component failed, it was
engineering’s fault for not designing it correctly. No matter what problem occurred in the field,
customer service would always put the blame on engineering.
As might be expected, engineering would blame most problems on production claiming that
production did not assemble the equipment correctly and did not maintain the proper level of
quality. Engineering would design a product and then throw it over the fence to production
without ever going down to the manufacturing floor to help with its assembly. Errors or
suggestions reported from production to engineering were being ignored. Engineers often
perceived the assemblers as incapable of improving the design. Production ultimately assembled
the product and shipped it out to the customer. Oftentimes during assembly the production
people would change the design as they saw fit without involving engineering. This would cause
severe problems with documentation. Customer service would later inform engineering that the
documentation was incorrect, once again causing conflict among all departments. The president
of Macon was a strong believer in project management. Unfortunately, his preaching fell upon
deaf ears. The culture was just too strong. Projects were failing miserably. Some failures were
attributed to the lack of sponsorship or commitment from line managers. One project failed as
the result of a project leader who failed to control scope. Each day the project would fall further
behind because work was being added with very little regard for the project’s completion date.
Project estimates were based upon a “gut feel” rather than upon sound quantitative data. The
delay in shipping dates was creating more and more frustration for the customers. The customers
began assigning their own project managers as “watchdogs” to look out for their companies’ best
interests. The primary function of these “watchdog” project managers was to ensure that the
equipment purchased would be delivered on time and complete. This involvement by the
customers was becoming more prominent than ever before. The president decided that action
was needed to achieve some degree of excellence in project management. The question was what
action to take, and when.

Guiding questions:
1. Where will the greatest resistance for excellence in project management come from?
2. What plan should be developed for achieving excellence in project management?
3. How long will it take to achieve some degree of excellence?
4. Explain the potential risks to Macon if the customer’s experience with project management
increases while Macon’s knowledge remains stagnant.
Answers to the question under the selected cases

Part I:
Case B: Wynn Computer Equipment (WCE)

1. As of the case given above, the WCE has many problems: among them;
A. Being a computer equipment manufacturer, the company hasn’t well organized &
computerized planning and control tools.
B. Though it is computer equipment manufacturing company, 80% of its employees
are nondegreed, and they do not know work breakdown structure. Moreover, the
employees are working at their personal efforts, and this helps them to develop
that they are the backbone of the organization which is bad and lead to rivalry
with the degreed employees.
C. Lack of team spirit is also the other major problem in the company; people in the
company are working their jobs without planning and control mechanisms which
this leads the employees to lose their commitment in their job.
D. There is a bad rivalry among the nondegreed & degreed workers which directly
affects the production line of equipment. This also made hard to the line managers
to take part in the project management which is complicated to do so for them.
E. There is no clear demarcation or limit of task assignments between line managers
and project managers of the company.
2. Accordingly, the major problem of the company will be:
 Lack of well-organized & computerized planning and control tools
3. NO. That’s why the line managers are feeling disgusting as there is no clear cut to their
task between the line and project management. In short, when the line starts to wear to hat,
that’s the starting of failures of the project.
4. As of my assumption and the principles of project management; Project lines should have
to be assigned their own responsible person. And, the employee educational level existing
in the company and other circumstances will lead us to do so.
 For the new processes/products, there must be one line manager and well
organized & computerized planning and controlling systems must be developed.
 The second line manager should be assigned for the continuous (old)
processes/products which is full of the above stated problems. So, the assigned
person should look after the existing problems & must put a strategic plan that can
move forward the company solving their rivalry and resource based problems for
organizational commitment.

PART II
Case Two A: Macon, Inc.
1. Greatest resistance for excellence in project management will be expected from the
following: • Macon Inc. Shareholders/owners, the internal human resource; which may be
 consist of existing employees, line managers and as the whole the board of the management
will be also.
According to this, the greatest challenge arise in Macon Inc. is from the section heads
& working sections (Specifically the production & Engineering).
The project is failing as the result of a project leaders are failing to control its scope and
functionality; the planning and quality control of the production to:
2. The project manager should let & order every section or working sections & units :
 Develop its planning, checking and controlling mechanisms
 Maintain the norm of accountability and responsibility in each section

Then, plans, actions and corrective measures should have to be developed by the
project manager, and the measures must be applied:

 To those (i.e. engineering section) who are ignoring suggestion s which come
from the production units & customers too.
 To those who change the design as they saw fit without involving engineering

The project manager should have to plan the ways of building its trust that customers can
rely a trust on. On the other hand, a system should have to be developed to check the
products before they are distributed to customers.

3.