Fluent Essays

1- to 2-page Microsoft Word document with double spacing, 12-point Times New Roman font, and one-inch margins. All sources must be cited in APA style. Project Scenario 1 Summary: Technical Redesign. One required source is Project Management Institute. (2017). A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) — Sixth Edition and Agile Practice Guide (ENGLISH). Newtown Square, PA: Project Management Institute.Specifically, the following critical elements must be addressed in this milestone:  Specify which scenario you intend to work with.  Using the scenario you have chosen and the case study information, explore the reasons why the past project failed. Consider factors such as sponsor commitment, senior management support, scope changes, funding, risks, project management methodology, priorities, resources, scheduling, and so on.  In the context of the project scenario you have chosen, which process group is easier for management to influence? Which will consume the most resources? Explain why and support your reasoning with PMI® principles. qso_345_milestone_one_guidelines_and_rubric.pdf waterloo.pdf qso345_project_scenario_one_technical_redesign.docx Unformatted Attachment Preview QSO 345 Milestone One Guidelines and Rubric Overview: The final project for this course is a project management plan report. You will create several components of a project management plan, synthesizing the skills learned in the course and required for the CAPM® into a well-organized deliverable. You will demonstrate your knowledge of CAPM®, specifically the ten knowledge areas and five process groups critical for an understanding of PMI®. A grasp of project management language, structures, and processes will help you succeed as either a member or leader of a project. This course is designed around the skills and abilities required for CAPM® certification and applicable to careers in project management. Gaining the CAPM® certification can make you more marketable to potential employers. Prompt: take time to read and understand the Harvard case study, Waterloo Regional Police Services: Reassessing the CIMS Project, which will be the basis of your final project. Once you are familiar with the case study, you will choose one of the following two scenarios. Note that you will work with your chosen scenario throughout the course; you cannot change your scenario choice at a later date. Project Scenario 1 Summary: Technical Redesign You are the project manager responsible for one of the projects in the overarching CIMS project program portfolio, and you will be managing the technical redesign due to the new federal requirements. Chief Gravill, your project sponsor, needs the technical software designs to be reviewed and the new federal requirements incorporated. Then the development, testing, validation, pilot, and deployment plans need a complete reworking. In addition to updates for the internal platform, updates are needed for all websites to comply with inclusion and disability standards. This project must be completed first before the vendor selection team can create the new requests for proposal (RFPs) and start vetting the new software vendors. Your development team has been given high-level sizing of six months and $300,000. The rest of the project team and operational costs are estimated to be $150,000. Chief Gravill says the project cannot take more than six months and has approved $200,000 more in the budget if the project can be done within four months. For complete project details, review the Project Scenario One: Technical Redesign document. Project Scenario 2 Summary: Procure a New Software Vendor The technical redesign has been completed, and you are the new project manager taking over one of the critical projects in the overarching CIMS project program portfolio; you need to select, contract, and onboard the new software vendor. Chief Gravill, your project sponsor, wants to get the project back on track and would like you to lead the new software vendor project. Since the past project was unable to identify a vendor and there are new federal requirements, this new project will be part of the critical path needed for CIMS program to get back on track. The project will involves creating new requests for proposal (RFPs) with the new requirements, vetting the best vendors, negotiating the new contract within budget, and onboarding the new vendor for the project. In addition to meeting the federal platform requirements, all of the regional offices need their websites updated to meet the new inclusion and disability requirements identified by the project team. Chief Gravill wants this project completed within the next two months, but it should not take more than five months. The operating budget for the project is $100,000, and the new vendor contract must be no more than $8.6 million for the internal software and $1 million for the website updates. For complete project details, review the Project Scenario Two: Procure a New Software Vendor document. Specifically, the following critical elements must be addressed in this milestone:    Specify which scenario you intend to work with. Using the scenario you have chosen and the case study information, explore the reasons why the past project failed. Consider factors such as sponsor commitment, senior management support, scope changes, funding, risks, project management methodology, priorities, resources, scheduling, and so on. In the context of the project scenario you have chosen, which process group is easier for management to influence? Which will consume the most resources? Explain why and support your reasoning with PMI® principles. Rubric Guidelines for Submission: Your paper should be a 1- to 2-page Microsoft Word document with double spacing, 12-point Times New Roman font, and one-inch margins. All sources must be cited in APA style. Critical Elements Scenario Reasons Proficient (100\%) Specifies a scenario Thoroughly explores the reasons why the past project failed Process Group Explains which process group is easier for management to influence, discusses which will consume the most resources, and provides supported rationale Articulation of Response Submission has no major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization Needs Improvement (75\%) Explores the reasons why the past project failed but leaves out a significant number of factors Explains which process group is easier for management to influence and discusses which will consume the most resources but lacks rationale and/or support Submission has major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that negatively impact readability and articulation of main ideas Not Evident (0\%) Does not specify a scenario Does not explore the reasons why the past project failed Does not explain which process group is easier for management to influence, discuss which will consume the most resources, or provide rationale Submission has critical errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that prevent understanding of ideas Total Value 10 40 40 10 100\% S w 907E10 WATERLOO REGIONAL POLICE SERVICES: REASSESSING THE CIMS PROJECT Professor Deborah Compeau and Jane Movold prepared this case solely to provide material for class discussion. The authors do not intend to illustrate either effective or ineffective handling of a managerial situation. The authors may have disguised certain names and other identifying information to protect confidentiality. Ivey Management Services prohibits any form of reproduction, storage or transmittal without its written permission. Reproduction of this material is not covered under authorization by any reproduction rights organization. To order copies or request permission to reproduce materials, contact Ivey Publishing, Ivey Management Services, c/o Richard Ivey School of Business, The University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada, N6A 3K7; phone (519) 661-3208; fax (519) 661-3882; e-mail cases@ivey.uwo.ca. Copyright © 2007, Ivey Management Services Version: (A) 2007-04-11 Larry Gravill, chief of the Waterloo Regional Police Service (WRPS), reflected on the last eight years and the attempts to build an integrated information system. The Common Information Management Systems (CIMS)1 project had begun in 1997, as a joint effort between WRPS and seven other police organizations. The project had been troubled since the beginning, and by now considerable resources had been invested into the CIMS project by all stakeholders involved. By September 2005, the relationship with the current vendor, Integrated Technologies Group (ITG), had become less productive. In addition, WRPS needed to install a suitable computer aided dispatch (CAD) and records management system (RMS), both key CIMS components, prior to December 31, 2005, since 2006 was the federally mandated deadline for implementation of this functionality within police agencies (i.e. Canadian Police Information Centre, or CPIC, interface deadline). Moreover, there were new vendors in the marketplace that had not existed when the original vendor selection was made, and Gravill wondered if one of them might be a better choice. However, he knew that WRPS resources would be heavily tasked to meet the December 31, 2005 deadline, even if a vendor were chosen immediately. Gravill knew that this was a critical moment. He had to determine the best way forward for WRPS to begin to achieve the benefits of an integrated and automated information system within the police service. WATERLOO REGIONAL POLICE SERVICES (WRPS) The WRPS employed 889 police service members in 2005: 652 police officers and 237 civilians, including support staff. This staff served a total population of 497,900 located in the Waterloo Region, which covered an area of 1,382 square kilometers. Waterloo, a prosperous region, had been ranked in the Top 7 1 Exhibit 1 contains a listing of all abbreviations and acronyms used in this document. This document is authorized for use only by Angel Ivy in QSO-345-Q3500 Project Mgmt/CAPM Cert 20EW3 at Southern New Hampshire University, 2020. Page 2 9B07E010 Smart Global Communities for the last two years by the Intelligent Community Forum (ICF) of New York City. Waterloo was also recognized internationally as a home to a leading computer science–oriented university (Waterloo University) and as a hub for many new and well-established high-tech organizations (as many as 150 computer science–oriented research firms). To serve this growing community, the WRPS comprised three major divisions that employed 430 police officers and 13 civilians, each division covering a different geographical area. In addition, a Community and Corporate Services group had a staff of 33 police officers and 15 civilians, and Support Services was staffed by 29 police officers and 149 civilians. The Information Technology Department, part of Support Services, consisted of two police officers and 17 civilians, while Investigative Services had 125 police officers and 17 civilians. Headquarters employed 33 police officers and 11 civilians. Finance and Administration had four civilians, and Supplies, Purchasing and Facilities had 11 civilians. In 2005, the WRPS gross operating budget was $87,435,381, with $74,506,287 allotted for salary and benefits; $5,764,344 for fleet, facilities; $2,683,445 for materials, supplies, uniforms, training maintenance; $2,218,159 for services, fees and rentals; $1,317,812 for financial expenses and $945,334 allotted for equipment. In 2005, WRPS received the Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police Community Policing Award, in recognition of the accomplishments of the Waterloo Working Group, a group of police, residents, business owners, elected representatives, social services and agencies that had worked together to develop long-term strategies for a safe and vital community. POLICE CHIEF LARRY GRAVILL2 Chief Gravill had been with the Waterloo Regional Police Service since 1973. He started his career performing patrol duties, and then was assigned to the Police Traffic Branch – Motorcycle Patrol. He was seconded to the Ontario Police Commission for two years, from 1977 to 1979. Many assignments followed, including project leader of the PRIDE3 computer system; executive officer to the chief of police divisional commander – Waterloo division; superintendent of field operations and deputy chief of administration. He was also the recipient of the Police Exemplary Service Medal. On October 1, 1992, Gravill was appointed chief of police of Waterloo Regional Police Service. He had also served as president of the Ontario Association of Chiefs of Police from 1997 to 1998, and accepted the major responsibility of service as president of the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police from 1999 to 2001. In addition, he was a member of the National Executive Institute Associates, a 400-plus-member foundation, affiliated with the United States Federal Bureau of Investigations. Chief Gravill had a long history of involvement with information systems. In 1981, he managed the implementation of the first police network to extend beyond the police services political and geographical boundaries (i.e. PRIDE). At that time, the Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) had a network, but it did not cross the organization’s boundaries. His appreciation for the value of effective management information systems in implementing strategies for operational success continued throughout his career. 2 The information provided in this section on Chief Gravill’s professional background with WRPS was obtained from WRPS: The CIMS Project Ivey business case, 2001. 3 PRIDE was the Police Regionalized Information Data Entry System. It was a joint initiative of WRPS and three other municipalities: Stratford, Brantford and Guelph. This document is authorized for use only by Angel Ivy in QSO-345-Q3500 Project Mgmt/CAPM Cert 20EW3 at Southern New Hampshire University, 2020. Page 3 9B07E010 CIMS PROJECT HISTORY In 1997, the Common Information Management Systems (CIMS) co-operative was formed to create a common information-sharing platform for a group of Ontario police services consisting of PRIDE, Durham Regional Police Service, Peel Regional Police Service, Halton Regional Police Service, Hamilton Police Service, York Regional Police Service and Niagara Regional Police Service. The PRIDE Group last upgraded its computer aided dispatch system (CAD) in 1989 and its records management system (RMS) in 1994. CIMS was a complicated software solution, with five integrated modules: CAD, RMS, mapping, mobile workstation environments and the CPIC module. Computer aided dispatch (CAD) was used to record calls and assign work to officers. The records management system (RMS) was the primary system for maintaining information on crimes and offenders. Mapping was the software that could generate maps for dispatchers to identify addresses quickly to officers. The mobile workstation environment referred to the systems in the patrol cars. CPIC was the module that was to provide integration with the Canadian Police Information Centre — a federally operated, computer-based information system that provided national information on crime. Standardized information (following the Universal Crime Reporting guidelines) was shared between police forces through CPIC on a regular basis. The complexity of the CIMS project resulted in a number of challenges in software development, implementation and project management. Adding to the complexity of the project was the disparity between the different police agencies involved, in terms of information needs and technical capability. Some agencies, such as Hamilton Police Service, had few information technology resources and desperately needed to replace key computer hardware and systems as soon as possible to avoid functional breakdown. Others agencies, such as WRPS, had information systems professionals on staff with reasonably reliable legacy systems, but recognized the need for updated information systems to meet growing needs, federally mandated functionality and multiagency information sharing needs. The initial request for proposal (RFP) for the CIMS project took two years for the project team to develop. No vendors were able to comply with the terms of the RFP, resulting in zero vendor responses. CIMS project staff took another year to rework the RFP, which resulted in one vendor response — from ITG. In August 1999, the CIMS group signed a contract with ITG to install a new CAD and RMS. The relationship with this vendor was rough for quite some time, due to contract and software functionality requirement misunderstandings, though some software functionality and integration was successfully implemented. The ongoing software functionality requirement and implementation difficulties led to a lack of trust in the ITG vendor / CIMS project group relationship. Changes to the Project Scope Since 1999, when the original CIMS contract was signed, additional functionality for the RMS system had been federally mandated, and these changes were outside of the scope of the original ITG contract. To maintain Canadian Police Information Centre (CPIC) query capabilities, the new federally mandated requirements for the RMS included replacement of the software interface currently used for the CPIC reporting. The software within RMS that tracked information for Statistics Canada, based on Universal Crime Reporting (UCR) guidelines, also needed to be updated in accordance with government requirements. This document is authorized for use only by Angel Ivy in QSO-345-Q3500 Project Mgmt/CAPM Cert 20EW3 at Southern New Hampshire University, 2020. Page 4 9B07E010 The federal government had planned to offer funding, by means of grants available to police services, to offset the cost of the federally mandated requirements for the RMS enhancements. However, this funding was unilaterally rescinded before any municipal police agency in Ontario received grants for this functionality. Therefore, the cost for ITG to provide this federally mandated functionality was becoming financially prohibitive for WRPS and the other police agencies. The projected cost for full implementation of the software was now more than $8.5 million (see Exhibit 2). Changes in the CPIC requirements also affected the ITG CAD system, since the ITG interface solution for CAD enhancements was becoming very labor intensive and costly. In addition, staff were not convinced that the ITG CAD solution, as a design-build system, could be successfully implemented and delivered as a working system with the required enhancements within the federally mandated timelines. Chief Gravill commented: We have serious doubts that ITG can deliver the results we need in time for this project. We do not think they can develop a system as complex as we have specified. We have multi-partners involved from the police side. ITG tried to incorporate all of our business practices into the system. They wanted to build a system for other police agencies to use. ITG was beginning to realize that considering the complexity of the software specifications, the financial payback on the project would not be great. ITG’s ability and our ability to satisfy this varied group’s needs is limited. Overall, I think it is very doubtful that ITG can deliver any significant portion of the required software solution within any reasonable timeframe. It took a lot of discussion for our folks to realize that rather than changing the system to suit our business practices we could change our business processes to suit a software package that is designed for a typical police agency. Do we want to spend a huge amount of money to change the package or develop software on our own . . . no. We do not likely need to as we are not really that different from other police agencies in Canada. This took quite a bit of internal education and selling to get the staff on board with this idea of changing our processes rather than changing the software. This was primarily the problem from the get-go of the CIMS project. The people at the middle level within our organization were saying that if we can get the vendor to make the changes to the software then we will not need to change our business practices. We found out the hard way that this is not the right way to go in the long run. I think it’s not worth it overall to customize software too much. That caused us a lot of problems with the CIMS project in the beginning. Now we have the opportunity to get the functionality that we want with the CIMS project through over-the-counter software products that were written for police agencies needs rather than through customized software altered for our needs specifically. That’s a much better deal. ITG is a good vendor, but in my mind software customization should only be done if absolutely necessary. ITG is not likely able to deliver the customized solution in time, so now it is time to re-assess the project and evaluate the products on the ma ... Purchase answer to see full attachment