Written Assignment Unit 2

University of the People

Department of Business Administration,

BUS 5611: Managing Projects and Programs

Case Study

Dr. Alexius Emejom

Introduction:

According to Sutterfield (2006), the project management process for the United States

Department of Defense (DOD) is complex and may take years to develop, implement, and lead

to meeting the objectives and goals of the project. Despite experiencing significant challenges

and setbacks over approximately ten years, the program appears to have endured due to the

compelling allure of a shared collective belief among its stakeholders. This phenomenon,

referred to by Royer (2003) as the "seductive appeal of collective belief," suggests that the

commitment and unified vision of the program's supporters played a crucial role in its

persistence and potential eventual success. In this paper, we will explore the stakeholders'

management and the analysis of their Influence before and after the implementation of the

Program Executive Officer.

The stakeholders before the implementation of the program Executive officer:

Stakeholders, whether internal or external, play a crucial role within the project team or scope.

Therefore, whether an individual or group is considered internal or external depends on the

observer's perspective (Sutterfield et al., 2006).

According to Sutterfield (2006), we can define stakeholders as below:

1. The Department of Defense

2. The Army material command

3. The transportation school

4. The troops support command

5. The Army
 6. The watercraft project manager

The Analysis of the Stakeholders:

The key responsibility for the command and DOD personnel in the project is that of the initiator.

Those in this role demonstrate a strong commitment to the project's goals and advancement.

Moreover, they have the authority to terminate the project if necessary, making them a

significant potential risk to its continuation. Their strategic methods involve comprehensive

analysis, successful conflict resolution, and strong leadership, all of which are crucial in keeping

the project on track and addressing any emerging issues promptly and efficiently.

The primary responsibility of the troop's support command is to provide critical support for the

project's end-user. This role involves securing high-level endorsement, which is crucial for the

project's success. Additionally, the project end-user holds significant influence, and failing to

meet their expectations poses a significant threat. To mitigate risks and ensure alignment with

the end user's expectations, comprehensive analysis and rigorous fact-checking are employed.

These strategies are essential to maintain the project's integrity and achieve its anticipated

outcomes.

Implementation of the program Executive officer:

The appointment of a new Program Executive Officer led to challenges as the individual lacked

the necessary support and expertise, which exacerbated existing issues (Sutterfield et al., 2006).
This change required engaging stakeholders on a more human resources level, rather than solely

focusing on specific aspects. Effective management of internal conflicts is essential for early

detection and resolution, ensuring that senior staff remain dedicated to addressing the issues.

Furthermore, these disagreements may lead other stakeholders to question the competency of the

project's execution (Program Management, 2022).

Due to inadequate communication and the appointment of an ill-prepared leadership staff

member, LAMP-H was ultimately shut down. The program had initially shown promise thanks

to its well-thought-out design and financial plan, led by individuals with a thorough

understanding of operational requirements. However, removing these key individuals from the

leadership team resulted in widespread confusion. Moreover, the misallocation of funds towards

achieving a more balanced vertical and horizontal movement, alongside the failure to complete

the necessary paperwork on time, led to budget overruns that were ultimately unsustainable

(Sutterfield et al., 2006). According to Kennedy (2020), any of these issues could have been

mitigated with a strategic plan in place, offering a clear roadmap for project completion, budget

management, necessary staffing, stakeholder involvement, and oversight. Additionally, strategic

plans could incorporate contingency measures for addressing failures or emergencies, ensuring

well-informed and carefully constructed remedial action throughout the project.

References:

Kennedy, R. (2020). Strategic management. Virginia Tech.

https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/handle/10919/99282

Program management. (2022). Program Management.

Journal.https://www.pmi.org/learning/featured-topics/program

Royer, I. (2003). Why bad projects are so hard to kill. Harvard Business Review, 81(2), 48–56.

Sutterfield, J.S., Friday-Stroud, S.S., & Shivers-Blackwell, S.L. (2006). A case study of project

and stakeholder management failures: Lessons learned. Project Management Journal, 37(5), 26-

35.