3.

What are the general steps for managing each work package within a specific
project?
Give Project team members responsibility of planning, Executing and Evaluation of
work packages. We need to know exactly what has to be done, when it needs to be
done, and by whom. All of the activities necessary to execute the project must be
clearly defined and coordinated. The required resources must be available when and
where they are required, in the appropriate quantities. Some actions must be
completed in a specific order, while others can be completed at the same time. Many
things must happen when and how they are expected to happen if a significant project
is to be completed on time and on budget. However, because each of these details is
unpredictable, risk management must be applied to each. We provide a theoretically
simple way to assist in sorting out and planning all of this detail in this section.
4. Describe the “hierarchical planning process” and explain why it is helpful.
HPP is a planning approach defines which activities need to be done by which
managerial level.

Level 1 - General list of activities in order of the whole project process.

At this level, a good amount of activities could be anywhere between 2 and 20. (These
boundaries aren't holy in any way.) At a particular level of aggregation, two is the
smallest conceivable breakdown, and 20 is about the maximum number of connected
items that can be safely sorted and scheduled.) Divide each of the Level l things into
two to twenty jobs.

Level 2 - Break every Level 1 tasks into more detailed sub-tasks.

Similarly, divide each Level 2 task into 2 to 20 sub-tasks.

Level 3 - define tasks into more manageable jobs. It is important that throughout this
hierarchical planning system, the objectives are taken from the project charter as they
are the same for all.
Continue in this manner until the precise tasks at a level are so well known that there
is no need to continue with the job breakdown; this is usually at the level of individual
workers. It's critical that all of the things on the list have roughly the same level of
task generality.

For example, are broken into finer detail yet the numerous chapters are generally at
the same degree of generality. Subdivisions of a chapter can even be subdivided into
finer detail. The importance of this simple aphorism cannot be overstated. It plays a
crucial role in the creation of the majority of the planning papers discussed in this
chapter and those that follow.
Problem
1. Top administrators in a university hospital have approved a project to improve the
efficiency of the pharmaceutical services department by the end of the fi scal year to
satisfy new state regulations for the coming year. However, they are concerned about
four potential threats: (1) The cost to implement the changes may be excessive, (2)
The pharmacists may resist the changes, (3) The project may run much longer than
expected and not be ready for the coming fiscal year, (4) The changes might reduce
the quality of drug care in the hospital. The likelihood and negative impact of each
threat have been solicited from the managers by a three-round Delphi process and are
as follows, based on a seven-point scale where seven is the most likely and most
negative impact:
Threat Probability Impact
1 5 3
2 6 5
3 3 4
4 4 7
Construct a risk matrix and identify what you would consider to be the “critical,”
“monitor,” and “ignore” threats. Explain your reasoning. Recommend and justify a
risk response for each threat.
Answer:

7
6 Threat 2
5 Threat 1
4 Threat 4
3 Threat 3
2
1
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Critical
Monitor
Ignore

Threat 1: It's possible that costs will become excessive. In fact, the likelihood is quite
high. This can be delegated to an outsourcing company to help mitigate the risk.

Threat 2: The likelihood of consumers rejecting change could generate significant

issues. This is a possibility, but it can be prevented if they are provided a choice and
advised ahead of time.

Threat 3: It's possible that the job will take longer than intended. This is unlikely,
however it is possible to transfer this by outsourcing the project.

Threat 4: The adjustments may lower the hospital's quality of care. Because the
benefits brought about by the new system may not be large, the probability is
satisfactory. If the quality declines, the consequences could be severe, so the hospital
may need to limit the threat by involving more consumers in the planning process.