Project Integration Management
[pic 1]PROJECT MANAGEMENT CT050-3-3-PRMGT[pic 2]ContentsNo table of contents entries found.Chapter 1: Project Integration Management1.0Business CaseIntroduction/backgroundHealthy Living Pte.Ltd. (HL) is one of the leading nutrition, health and wellness multinational companies, based in Singapore with its global IT shared services known as Global IT Services (GITS) located in Malaysia has embarked on a new project to its enhance supply chain operations. The first wave will be concentrated to South East Asia and the implementation will be deployed by marketsBusiness objectiveThe business objective of this project is to significant contribution such as reduction in capital/operating expenses, centralized support from GITS, global governance and many more value added are gained.Current situation and problem/opportunity statementHL has use high IT cost for operation and the duplications created by different market due to decentralisation system used. Nonetheless, there are opportunities for HL replace the decentralisation system with centralize system by implement Global Supply Chain Management Project (GSCMP). However, there were some problem exist in the process of implementation of GSCMP. The project must be complete within 6 months and the project team was lack of structure. 18 problem faced include:Mapping problem statement and knowledge area
[pic 3]NoProblem1.The steering committee (which consist of the board of directors, CEO and Senior Managers of the organization) do not recall of being presented the project feasibility study by the Project Sponsor or the Project Manager to them.2.The project approval was not formally documented.3.There is no evidence that a proper project management process was followed4.The PC and server hardware technical specifications were constantly being changed to suit new or added requirements.5.Requirements keep coming in from users almost daily where the GITS-ADC Team Lead keeps on accepting them without hesitation.6.There was redundancy of work performed as the Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) was done separately by each respective department and the Project Manager did not review and then consolidate those WBSs into one holistic WBS.7.Most of the team members have been focusing more on their daily operation support rather than tasks being assigned by the Project Manager or their respective Team Lead.8.Tasks are performed without prioritizing other dependent tasks.9.IT assets acquisition and spending were through PROC Manager with suppliers without going through a proper tendering process.10.Purchasing of IT assets without a proper tendering process has led to overrun by budget.11.The testing plan was not developed yet.12.There were not even a clear designated sponsor (or sponsors) for the project.13.There was no clear project organizational structure to manage the project.14.The Project Manager’s authority was constantly overridden by the department head /managers.15.Technical skills were especially lacking in the network and security areas.16.There were no monitoring reports to review as none were prepared and formally documented.17.The risks associated with the project, although documented, had no detailed action plans and were not categorized in terms of impact or severity.18.The hardware and software delivery was still being negotiated with some potential vendors while there were only four (4) months to complete the project.