Proctor and Gamble Case Study

Proctor and Gamble Case Study

List and describe the project team roles.

The project management (senior organization management) identifies the necessity to upgrade the company’s nearly 20-year-old ordering, shipping, and billing software. The managers also come up with a plan to ensure the project does not involve just a basic IT patch but a wholesome improvement from the older version of the IT system to ensure it results in efficiencies in the supply chain and reduction in the cost of running the enterprise. The manager also determined the most appropriate methodology for implementing the project, including variables such as scheduling and activities conducted during each phase to ensure no glitch would subject the project and the entire organization to its deathbed. This is because the project would need quite a considerable timeline. Given the revenue the system handles in its operations, US $ 200 million a day, the managers organized global workshops through which the implementation team was entirely oriented into the scope of the project (Jackson II, 2012). The managers also identified ways of managing the risks encountered in the project implementation including evaluation of human resource challenges which was solved through relocation of staff from other areas to the project implementation team.

The project team (the business service group) fundamentally needed to complete the assigned deliverables summing up the creation of a project charter. They also provided expertise in making up a business case. Moreover, in contributing to the overall objective of the plan they also had to create a project statement of work to ensure the preservation of business continuity amidst project implementation. As a team, this faction collectively assessed the benefits and the risks involved in the project implementation process. The team also worked with the end-users, watching out for the benefits of the additional features introduced to the products by the project. The team was also involved in the documentation of the potential gaps in the scope of implementation during the workshops organized.

The team leaders oversaw the central technical project management teams regionally. Given the complexity and size of the project, the project team was divided into local market teams to ensure a synchronized implementation, thus birthing the position of team leaders. The leaders also inspired a working spirit from the team members by acting as working members. Furthermore, they implemented networking events to establish the allocation of resources for specific projects. They encouraged management visits, thus acting as team advocates besides negotiating with the management to participate in the visits to inspire and recognize the milestones achieved by the team. Lastly, the leaders communicated the events of the implementation to other teams globally. The unrivaled coordination, therefore, ensured the change occurred without the external world catching a glimpse of the process.

List the stakeholders and why you think they are stakeholders

Stakeholders in project management denote parties with a vested interest or impacted by the project change either directly or indirectly. Therefore any party with connections to the project is regarded as a stakeholder regardless of the magnitude of their influence on the project (Voropaev et al., 2016). In the P&G case study, the product consumers are the first stakeholders as the project would directly impact the diverse portfolio of company products, thus affecting consumption patterns. The customers who are the local retailers are also regarded as stakeholders as the provision and supply of the products would also be affected by the project. The P&G management, including the board of directors, are also stakeholders as they actively participated in the identification of the need to upgrade the IT software for operational efficiency.

The project implementation team, and the global service groups, were also actively involved in the step-by-step implementation of the project and interaction with the local markets to determine the benefits of the project change. The IT department, under the leadership of the respective regional directors who were also stakeholders, analyzed the specifics surrounding the implementation of the project, including the success and botches of implementations in other companies to make recommendations to the implementation team. The company’s staff were also stakeholders in the project as the reshuffling of human resources relocated them from other areas to fill the workforce gap in the project implementation team. Lastly, the heads of local market offices also performed a vital role of being team leaders in the implementation process thus also classified as stakeholders.

Identify the key stakeholders.

Key stakeholders have an elevated influence on the project cycle and are consequently greatly impacted by the project change. In the P&G case study, the organization management, who also doubles up as the project managers, are the first key stakeholders. From the conceptualization of the project, the assignment of project team roles to the making of critical decisions such as re-channeling the organization’s workforce, the management is significantly involved in the project process. Moreover, they are also interested in maintaining the profits of the organization amidst the project implementation with the fear of reaching rock bottom in case a glitch is encountered.

The second key stakeholder is the business service group which comprises the project implementation team. The team is vital in seeing the project to the light of day, given their fundamental role of creating a project charter and offering expertise in the implementation process. The last key stakeholders are customers, the local retailers. With the project influencing shipping and order, the customers would be greatly affected, causing the management to spare time to engage the retailers to gauge their experiences on the project change. This evidences the great impact of the project change.

References

Jackson II, K. (2012). 2012 PMI PROJECT OF THE YEAR AWARD FINALIST-On the Move-A research laboratory stays on the cutting edge with a new site—But only after securing support from skeptical stakeholders on the inside and out and creating robust risk-management plan. PM Network-Project Management, 26(12), 40.

Voropaev, V., Gelrud, Y., & Klimenko, O. (2016). Who manages what? Project management for different stakeholders. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 226, 478-485.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

We’ll write everything from scratch

---

Mini Case Study – Proctor & Gamble Case Study

In this assignment, you will explore the business situation that Proctor and Gamble faced and how it was resolved using effective project management.

Refer to the attached documents for the case study and full assignment details and the rubric.

The requirements for the assignments are:

• Read the Mini Case Study attached to the assignment.
  • P&G Mini Case Study
• Address the following items based on the reading:
  1. List and describe the project team
  2. List the stakeholders and why you think they are
  3. Identify the key
• The paper must be APA-formatted as a Word
• SafAssign will be used to check this assignment for Remember to paraphrase in your own words and do not copy directly.
• The length must be a minimum of two pages, excluding the title and reference
• Include at least one

Refer to the next page for the grading rubric.

Students: Be sure to read the criteria, by which your paper/project will be evaluated, before you write, and again after you write.

Grading Rubric

 

CRITERIA	Deficient	Proficient	Exemplary
	0 – 47 points	48-53 points	54-60 points
Stakeholder and Project Team	Two or more stakeholder or project team items from above are not addressed adequately.	One stakeholder or project team item from above is not addressed in sufficient detail.	Stakeholder and project team items detailed above are clearly addressed in sufficient detail.
	0-15 points	16-17 points	18-20 points
Clear and professional writing and APA format	Errors impede professional presentation; guidelines not followed	Few errors that do not impede professional presentation	Writing and format is clear, professional, APA compliant, and error free
	0 – 7 points	8 points	9-10 points
Resources	No resource or inappropriate resource	One Appropriate Resource	More than One Appropriate Resource
	0 – 7 points	8 points	9-10 points
Paper Length	Less than 2 pages of appropriate content.	2 pages of appropriate content.	More than 2 pages of appropriate content.