Module 7: Final Paper

by:

Brian Graham

OGL 321: Project Leadership, Strategy, and Scope

for

Mr. Ben Pandya

Submission Date: 3.3.20

1
I. Introduction

In this final paper for OGL 321, the goal of this two part reflection assignment

is to consider the content and experiences I have gained not only in this

course, but also in the introductory project management course OGL 320

titled Introduction to Project Management.

II. Part One

For me, looking back on OGL 320 and my previous understanding of project

management versus OGL 321 and my current understanding of project

management, a lot of growth has taken place between those two

experiences. In OGL 320 I felt those learnings were about the rudiments and

primary concepts of managing a project, and with OGL 321 transitioning to a

very practical set of applications where I put those principles into practice.

The primary area of growth I felt I experienced was focused on appropriately

managing project resources and monitoring budget. I say this because

simulation to simulation I was fairly consistent in the management of project

scope and project scheduling. My primary challenge was attempting to

manage project resources and budget throughout the changing requirements

of the scenarios and simulations.

2
That said, through a lot of persistence, trial and error, I improved my scoring

in this area to where on my very last simulation attempt on Scenario F, I got

my first bonus (only an eleven point bonus, but it is a bonus just the same!)

and of my accomplishments in the simulations, this was one I looked at with

the most pride because it took a lot of diligence and hard work to get there.

As a result of OGL 321, I find myself giving a lot more consideration to

particular areas, principles and practices in project management where before

I would have never thought of doing so. For example, in managing project

scope and project scheduling, I would have not really thought much about the

impact of even the slightest adjustments to project parameters and what they

can do to a project outcome.

I felt strongly about the impact of minor project adjustments on project

success, especially with communication style, type and frequency. Early on in

my simulations, for example, I didn’t give much thought about meetings. As I

am primarily self-driven, I didn’t really think much about how that

communication style could impact a team during the simulations. From my

own experience, If I am given an instruction as part of a team, I take that and

run with it. I somewhat expect the team members to share similar traits, and

with a new team, that was not the case as I learned.

3
As I am not accustomed to a lot of meetings, early in the simulations process

I didn’t schedule many meetings at all, thinking that if team members knew

what they were supposed to do, that would be mostly good for everyone. I

quickly found that to not be the case, and adjusted accordingly. As a result of

this learning, I was constantly watching the team morale and stress indices,

being mindful of the impact my project management actions were having on

team members.

Given my previous experience and interactions with the Harvard Simulation

scenarios, it has definitely shaped my personal approach to project

management. My preconceived approach to project management before the

scenarios and simulations was to get the project specifications and get to

work against the requirements, and not much more than that. Therefore, my

approach was very bottom line oriented, get to the work, get to the results,

and if there were inconveniences along the way, so be it.

OGL 321 has taken me through a very interesting metamorphosis. I went into

the scenarios and simulations not really knowing what to expect, and thought

I could just work my way through the simulations and tweak something here,

and tweak something there, and end up with a positive outcome. This, of

course, was not the case. The process of building a knowledge map helps

clarify what is known in relation to the project (Cleden, p. 66) and this helped

me a lot in tracking what needed to be done, when, and why.

4
It became clear to me as the scenarios went on, that I needed a more holistic

view of project management, not the view I brought with me where I felt I

could just work my way through a scenario and everything would be fine. My

assessment of how this has helped to define my personal approach is that

now I have a broader vision of the overall project, and the various

components that help make a project successful. I learned very quickly that I

needed to have a view of project management that took everything into

consideration when making decisions on how to deliver a project, and be

mindful of the consequences that even the smallest decision or adjustment

could have on the success or failure or a project.

For me, the areas I would tend to emphasize while managing a project where

trade-offs were inevitable would be to ensure project scope and schedule

were top priority. This was because I felt that if you couldn’t design a product

and get it out the door on time, the rest of the project considerations were

moot. Of equal priority to me was the team process and being aware of the

impact of that scope and scheduling decisions would have on stress levels

and team morale.

When it came to making a trade-off to accomplish the primary senior

management objectives, it seemed to always come down to project resources

and sacrificing budget in order to accomplish those objectives. Many times I

5
ended up sacrificing budget, or project resources, in order to accomplish my

top line objectives.

This was the case for me in all my scenarios and simulations, until the very

last simulation of the very last scenario. As I mentioned previously, I finally

was able to balance enough of the project components that I did, just once,

succeed in getting a 100% score in managing project resources. For me, this

reinforced that when it comes to project management, as in life, little things

mean a lot. I found that in many cases that even the smallest adjustments

sometimes had broad implications and impact on project outcomes.

The area that I found my biggest challenge was in an area where I least

expected it – with my own leadership. This takes a lot for me to admit, but

what I experienced early on in the simulations was that I was indecisive and

had a lot of self-doubt. I was unsure of what I should do, and I feel it was

reflected in the quality of my decisions. So my biggest challenge was to

overcome this set of emotions by preparing, and in some cases,

overpreparing for upcoming simulations. By charting what my plans in the

simulation were, and also tracking and graphing what I actually did in the

scenarios gave me the confidence I needed to continually improve with each

succeeding scenario. Needless to say, I was very pleased to work through

this challenge.

6
Lastly, I have learned there is a significant connection between the skills I

have gained in project management through OGL 321 and how those are

relevant in my professional life. Specifically, I am referring to the work I have

discussed in previous papers for the school board where my children attend

school. An important part of any project deals with ethical behavior. For

project managers, they have to make a decision and action that goes down

one path or the other. Either way, positives and negatives exist, and there is

no choice but to choose one. Everything then becomes a matter of gray

rather than black or white. In other words, project managers face an ethical

moment of truth, which then becomes a test of character (Kliem, p. 34).

In our simulations, there were tests of character, which in my opinion came in

the form of not laying off team members when the going got tough, or by

withholding communication to the team in a style or level of frequency that

would have been more helpful. In my work on the school board, many ethical

dilemmas present themselves, and I find myself guided by the four basic

principles the Project Management Institute espouses that form their Code of

Ethics: responsibility, respect, fairness, and honesty. This code affirms these

four values as its foundation (PMI document, p. 2). These ethical principles

are definite takeaways that will go with me in my professional life.

7
III. Part Two

I'd like to offer three areas of advice for someone preparing to start the

Harvard Project Management Simulation for the first time. The words of

wisdom I could impart would be:

 Be keenly focused on senior management directives, and work to

deliver what they ask for. This means if they ask for a multi-function

printer, don’t work on something else, despite how daunting the task

may appear. Points awarded you will be contingent on delivering what

they ask for.

 Start well resourced, work well resourced, stay well resourced. This

means try not to have big fluctuations in headcount to match whatever

business conditions are thrown your way.

 In all things moderation and balance in project scope, schedule and

resources. Big variations in one of the three levers of project

management will likely have a negative impact on your score.

 Be ready to make the tough decisions, such as trade-offs in order to

meet senior management objectives. For me, it meant sacrificing

project resources (budget) in order to get the product made and out

the door. Despite this, my overall score when I did this was not

completely devastated.

8
Critical trends or patterns I found in the different scenarios:

 I encourage a good pattern of balance in the types and frequency of

team communications. Too many meetings equals boredom, too little

communication leads to errors. A good balance will mitigate those

risks.

 I found another good pattern to follow was the tracking of results

simulation by simulation. This had a positive impact on scenario

scoring because of the understanding of outcomes of certain

decisions. I offered this advice on our discussion boards and received

positive feedback for doing so.

 I found that a consistent number of prototypes evenly spaced through

the project helped the team make a better product. This is contingent

upon the number of weeks you assign to a project. Too few and not a

good product, too many and it has a point of diminishing returns.

My own personal model of causal relationships that exist within projects is

that the project levers are inextricably linked. What I mean by this is that the

project scope affects the project schedule, the project schedule affects the

project resourcing, and the productivity of the team is affected by the project

resourcing. Imagine a clock face with each of these four components at the

12, 3, 6 and 9 numbers of the clock face with the clock hands moving

9
clockwise. This would represent my own personal model of causal

relationships in project management.

10
References:

Cleden, David (2016): Managing Project Uncertainty; Routledge

Kliem, P. R. L. (2011). Ethics and project management. Retrieved from

file:///C:/Users/bgrah/Desktop/OGL%20321%20module%206%20pmi%20code%20of
%20ethics.pdf PMI Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct

11