Management of Risk in IT Projects

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Addressing Troubled IT Projects
Similarities and Differences between the Two Approaches
Catastrophic IT Projects
References

Complex undertakings are associated with various problems. The same is observed in information technology (IT) projects. Major problems that face organizations in the IT sector are mainly liked to budgets, schedules, and quality management. Several approaches have been developed to deal with such issues. They include, among others, ‘rescue the problem project’ and the catastrophe disentanglement approaches.

Addressing Troubled IT Projects

Rescue the Problem Project

The approach was developed by Todd C. Williams. It does not focus on the development of processes that aid in the running of the problematic project. On the contrary, it seeks to establish the root cause of the problem. As such, a failing undertaking is transformed into a success.

The main task is to acknowledge the presence of the problem (Williams, 2011). The approach proposes four major steps to help in the recovery of projects. They include audit, analysis, negotiation, and execution phases. The audit process helps the project manager to assess the extent of the problem. The analysis helps to determine issues associated with the processes, technology, and people. More emphasis is put on people.

At the same time, dynamics around the problem are identified. The negotiation process is guided by the project manager. The administrator acts as a mediator between the stakeholders (Williams, 2011). As such, transforming red projects into successful undertakings is a team effort. Execution is the final step, which involves solving the problem identified. Efforts are made to prevent the occurrence of the same issues.

Catastrophe Disentanglement Approach

The strategy was developed by Bennatan. It is aimed at preventing the escalation of problems within projects. It is mainly concerned with undertakings involving the development of software (Bennatan, 2006). Major problems facing such projects include quality, schedule, and cost.

The approach places more emphasis on the roles of two key individuals. The two are the project manager (a senior official within the firm) and the evaluator (Bennatan, 2006). The approach proposes ten steps to help resolve the issues facing a project. To begin with, all activities are halted. An evaluator is then assigned. Evaluation of the project status then commences. The team dealing with the undertaking is also evaluated. Minimum goals are defined.

An analysis is then carried out to determine whether they are achievable or not. The next step involves rebuilding the team. Risk analysis is conducted by the new team. The team later revises the initial plan (Widman, 2008). Finally, early warning systems are put in place to avert future problems.

Similarities and Differences between the Two Approaches

Similarities

Both strategies focus on the need to establish the root cause of the problem. The assumption is that the underlying issues can only be resolved by first identifying the source of the problem. In both approaches, projects are halted to allow time for the problem to be resolved. The aim is to avoid further complication that may be tough to address (Bennatan, 2006; Williams, 2011). The two approaches also stress on the need to put in place measures to avoid the occurrence of similar problems.

Differences

The ‘rescue the problem project’ approach focuses more on people than on technology and processes. Team work is encouraged (Williams, 2011). On its part, the catastrophe disentanglement approach pays more attention to processes and technology. Only the project manager and evaluator are deeply involved in decision making (Bennatan, 2006).

Furthermore, the ‘rescue the problem project’ approach emphasizes on the establishment of internal mechanisms to address problems. The evaluator used in the catastrophe disentanglement approach is, however, an outsider. They are sought to oversee the successful solving of the problem identified.

Catastrophic IT Projects

Key Findings about the IBM Stretch Project

The undertaking is one of the biggest IT catastrophes in history (Widman, 2008). It commenced in 1965. Its goal was to produce the fastest supercomputer of the time. The decision was arrived at after the top management felt that the company was lagging behind in terms of technological advancement.

The type 704 and 705 computers that had been developed by the organization failed to place it at the top of key innovators in the industry (Goth, 2012). Speed was one of the greatest factors that determined the success of computer systems. As a result, the management felt that the firm could only enhance its competitiveness by developing a faster system than the 704 and 705. Consequently, the Stretch project was started to develop the 7030 model.

Dunwell was the project’s chief engineer. He was quoted stating that the new model would be up to 100 times faster than its predecessor (Widman, 2008). The price of the system was set at $13.5 million. However, the project was not as successful as anticipated. The Stretch super computer was only 30-40 times faster than the 705 model.

Subsequently, IBM was forced to lower the prices of these systems to $7.8 million. The amount was not enough to cater for the expenses incurred during its development (Goth, 2012). As such, the project was abandoned after only nine systems had been developed. The failure helped to shape the IT sector today.

References

Bennatan, E. (2006). Catastrophe disentanglement: Getting software projects back on track. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Addison-Wesley Professional.

Goth, G. (2012). An overview of the IBM Power 775 Supercomputer water cooling system. Journal of Electronic Packaging, 134(2), 20906.

Widman, J. (2008). IT’s biggest project failures, and what we can learn from them. Web.

Williams, T. (2011). Rescue the problem project a complete guide to identifying, preventing, and recovering from project failure. New York: AMACOM.

Click Here To Order Now!