The Critical Success Factors Of Scope Management Information Technology Essay

The Critical Success Factors Of Scope Management Information Technology Essay Until today, the ICT project success has yet to demonstrate an excellent track record. Findings from a research done by Standish Group from 1994 until 2009 revealed that the percentage for challenge and failure IT projects was still high as compared to that of a successful project [4]. There are many reasons which contribute to these failure. One of the main reasons is the poor PSM ([3],[5]). According to many researchers, PSM is a critical area which needs to be given attention in ensuring the success of a project ([6]-[11]). Based on the literature review, it has been found that none of the research done applies the concept of CSF in ICT PSM in order to upgrade the ICT project success. Therefore, this research was conducted with the intention to identify the CSFs in PSM, which could contribute to the ICT project success, in terms of stakeholders satisfaction, time estimation accuracy and cost estimation accuracy. It was expected that this study would give researchers some new insights on PSM CSFs for ICT project success. This paper consists of four sections, which are background, research methods, results and discussion, and conclusions. II. BACKGROUND This section explains briefly two main concepts in this research, which are ICT Project Scope Management and CSF. Then, a brief explanation will be given on the research factors which are obtained from the combination between failure factors and success factors in PSM. These factors have the potential to contribute to the ICT project success. ICT Project scope management In this research context, ICT Project Scope Management is defined as the processes required to ensure that the ICT project includes all the work required, and only the work required, to complete the project successfully [12]. Meanwhile, ICT is defined as any product that will store, retrieve, manipulate, transmit, or receive electronically in a digital form, which comprises of technology, communication and application [13]. PSM is one of the nine project management fields of knowledge [12]. It is very crucial in ensuring the project success as compared to the other eight fields of knowledge [6]. PSM includes the process of scope planning, requirements collection, scope definition, WBS creation, scope verification and scope control. All these processes are needed to ensure that only the required work will be carried out. Any unnecessary works is a waste and can increase the risks in project management [15]. Incomplete and vague project scope could cause requirement creep and scope creep [5] which could cause the project to be incomplete on time and at a predetermined cost. It could also cause the delivery produced (product, service or result) could not satisfy the stakeholders. The Critical success factor approach In 1979, Rockart introduced the CSF method and concluded that CSF is an effective and efficient method to assess data requirements [19]. This method has been studied until it becomes more stable ([20]-[21]) and it has been applied widely in various industry sectors and domains [22]. Bullen and Rockart defines CSF as the limited number of areas in which satisfactory results will ensure successful competitive performance for the individual, department, or organization. CSFs are the few key areas where things must go right for the business to flourish and for the managers goal to be attained [20]. According to them, each CSF set is created uniquely and differently based on the environment where this method is applied. In IT/ICT project management field, CSF method is applied as an effort to upgrade the ICT project success such as to plan, develop and implement the software project ([23]-[24]) and data depository execution [25]. Success Factors in ICT Project Scope Management Based on a thorough review done on academic and practitioner literatures, it has been found that there was no formal research that has been carried out to identify CSFs in ICT Project Scope Management. However, there were success and failure researches in ICT projects such as software projects, development and implementation projects of information system, web-based project and network installation project which involve project scope ([6],[23],[26]-[33]). From these researches, the factors which have the same criteria were combined according to three dimensions: Project, Process and People. To determine the project success attributes which reflect the whole perception on an ICT project success, PMBOK guidelines were used which demonstrate the essential relationship between PSM and Project Time Management, and between PSM and Project Cost Management [12]. Based on the stakeholders role and responsibility in managing project scope, the stakeholders satisfaction as an ICT project success attribute was taken into account ([12],[14],[34]-[35]). Table 1 shows the summary of the attributes used in this research. TABLE 1 SUCCESS ATTRIBUTES Dimension Attribute Overall perceived level of success Stakeholders satisfaction (Stakeholders are satisfied, accept and approve with the project scope planned, defined and implemented; All the deliverables produced by the project were accepted and approved by the stakeholders). Time estimation accuracy (All the work that has to be carried out (project scope) for a project helps successfully in estimating the time needed to complete a project; Clear main deliverables (product, service, result) helps successfully in estimating the duration of time needed to complete a project. Cost estimation accuracy (All the work that has to be done for a project (based on the scope) helps successfully in estimating the cost needed to complete the project). III. METHODOLOGY This research was an exploratory survey which used quantitative method. The instrument used was a questionnaire and it was developed based on the combination of failure and success factors gained from the literature review. Reliability test, factor analysis and regression analysis have been conducted to determine the critical success factor using SPSS version 17. Survey questionnaire In this study, a survey questionnaire was employed as the method of data collection. A structured questionnaire was constructed to capture the respondents perception of the questions. The survey instrument consists of six sections. The first section was on respondents profile and demographic information. The second, third and fourth sections were on success factors related to project, process and people. The fifth section was on perception of ICT project success. The last section was for additional comments, where respondents were invited to give any feedback or thought related to the questions stated. To measure the importance of success factors and perception of ICT project success, a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1= strongly disagree to 5=strongly agree was adopted to solicit the perceptions on the degree of importance for the identified success factors relative to the ICT project success. An in-depth discussion about the questionnaire was done with five experts in ICT project management, who were two experts from the public sector, two experts from the private sector and one expert from academia. All five experts have experience of at least five years in ICT project scope management and more than ten years of experience in ICT project development. The purpose of this discussion was to obtain opinions, views, suggestions or comments about the survey instrument content validity and face validity. Feedback from the expert was used to refine the clarity of the questionnaire items by rephrasing the items as necessary. The internal consistency reliability of the items in the questionnaire was tested by conducting a pilot study. The respondents for pilot test were ICT officers working in Malaysian public sector. A pilot survey was administered to five public sector agencies with the distribution of ten sets of questionnaires for each agency. 31 respondents returned their feedback after waiting period of 20 days. Cronbachs alpha was used for the internal consistency reliability testing. The results of these tests shows that the values for the entire construct were greater than 0.8. Thus, it shows that the items in the questionnaire have a good degree of reliability [36]. This indicates that there were no problems with the internal consistency reliability. Data collection method The target population for this study was ICT professionals in Malaysian public sectors. One thousand questionnaires, delivered personally by hand, were administered from 1st March 2010 among Malaysian public sector ministries, departments and agencies located in Putrajaya and Cyberjaya. For other locations, three hundred questionnaires were distributed using web-based survey method from 8th March 2010. The questionnaires used for both methods were the same. After six weeks of survey period, a total of 561 valid questionnaires, representing response rate of 43.15%, were received (531 were collected personally and 10 were collected through web-based interface). Data analysis method Factor analysis and stepwise multiple regression were used to analyze data from the survey questionnaire. Factor analysis was conducted in three stages [37]. The first stage was the assessment of the suitability of the data. The correlation among the factors was identified by examining the correlation matrix among items, Bartletts Test Sphericity and Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy (KMO MSA). The second stage was factor extraction. Common factor analysis and principal axis factoring technique were used to extract the factors. Kaisers criterion or eigen value rules were used to determine the number of factors to be retained. The third stage was factor rotation and interpretation. The orthogonal rotation approach with Varimax method and cut-off loading point 0.4 [38] were used to clarify the factor structure. Factor extraction and rotation will be repeated until there were no cross-loading factors or no factor loading value less than cut-off loading point. Items with fa ctor cross loading or factor loading less than cut-off loading point were eliminated [38]. Stepwise regression solution procedure was used to determine the CSFs of PSM which contribute to the ICT project success. Through this procedure, only significant success factors were used in the model. The general multiple regression model is: Y = A + B1X1 + B2X2 + à ¢Ã¢â€š ¬Ã‚ ¦ + BkXk where Y is the dependent variable (DV), A is the Y intercept, the Xs represent the various independent variables (IVs) and Bs are the coefficients assigned to each of the IVs during regressions [39]. In this research, the IVs were the success factors of ICT project scope management and the DVs were the stakeholders satisfaction, time estimation accuracy and cost estimation accuracy. IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Factor analysis The result of factor analysis as shown in Table 2 shows seven factors with 45 attributes which were included in the structure and explained 60.57% of the total variance. All the seven factors were translated according to the items included in the factors. The first factor was called stakeholders commitment which consists of 12 items. The second factor was called Work Breakdown Structure which consist of 11 items. The third factor was called project objective and justification definition which consists of 9 items. The forth factor was called change control which consists of 4 items. The fifth factor was called project constraint definition which consists of 3 items. The sixth factor was called realistic project assumption which consists of 3 items. The seventh factor was called business knowledge which consists of two items. TABLE 2 FACTOR STRUCTURE FOR PRINCIPAL AXIS FACTORING EXTRACTION AND VARIMAX ROTATION ON PSM SUCCESS FACTORS ITEMS Item Factor 1: Stakeholder commitment Percent of variance explained = 43.381, Cumulative percent of variance explained = 43.381 The project received strong top management support during the process of project scope management. The project had a cooperative and supportive process owner during requirements elicitation. The Steering Committee is committed to the meeting scheduled Users are able to explain their needs or requirements to project team or project developer. Project manager have the communication skills to communicate with all stakeholders involved in the project scope management. Project Team meetings held regularly to manage the project scope processes. Project Champion commitment, especially during a crisis in managing the project scope Project team members fully responsible in managing the project scope. Method of brainstorming or face to face is used to obtain user requirements. Project manager fully responsible in managing the project scope. Project team members have knowledge in ICT field that will be required for the development and implementation of the project. Roles and responsibilities of project team is determined and clearly defined Factor 2: Work breakdown structure Percent of variance explained = 4.892, Cumulative percent of variance explained = 48.272 The infrastructure (hardware, networking, telecommunication) specification is compatible with the product (system) to be produced. The software specification is compatible with the product (system) to be produced. The system development methodology is suitable to the product (system) to be produced The application specification is complete and clearly defined The user requirements are realistic. User requirements specific to the project objectives to be achieved. Each user requirements meet business requirements embodied in the project. User requirements can be implemented in accordance with the stipulated time period. Human resources responsible for carrying out each of work activity is clearly mapped in the WBS hierarchy. Distribution of activities in the WBS is well planned and precisely defined. The WBS defined the project overall scope. Factor 3: Project objective justification definition Percent of variance explained = 3.460, Cumulative percent of variance explained = 51.732 Specific and clear project objectives Realistic project objectives Achievable project objectives Acceptable project objectives by main stakeholders Measurable project objectives Justification stated the importance or benefit of the project implementation. Justification focuses on the organization goal to be achieved. Clearly defined works that included in the project. Justification stated the improvement of employees skill with the implementation of the project. Factor 4: Change control Percent of variance explained = 2.601, Cumulative percent of variance explained = 54.333 Coordinating Committee set the action to be taken for the change request. Decisions and actions taken for the change request was agreed by all members of the Coordinating Committee. Decision made by Coordinating Committee is well recorded Coordinating Committee taking into account the interests, benefits and negative affects for each of the change request. Factor 5: Project constraint definition Percent of variance explained = 2.409, Cumulative percent of variance explained = 56.742 Clearly defined uncontrollable project constraints. Clearly defined controllable project constraints. Source(s) for each constraint (controllable or uncontrollable) are clearly described. Factor 6: Realistic project assumption Percent of variance explained = 2.187, Cumulative percent of variance explained = 58.929 Realistic project deliverables (product, service, results) Realistic technical assumptions Realistic assumptions of project management organization Factor 7: Business knowledge Percent of variance explained = 1.644, Cumulative percent of variance explained = 60.573 Project team members have knowledge in business processes related to the project. Project manager have knowledge in business processes related to the project. The seven factors were translated into seven main hypotheses. The hypotheses were numbered from 1 to 7. Since there were three success dimensions for each factor, the corresponding success dimensions were identified by the letters a, b and c. As a result, there were a total of 21 hypotheses, from 1a until 7c as stated above. Hypotheses related to the Project dimension: H1: The existence of well-defined project objective and justification is a PSM CSF that contributes to the success of ICT project in terms of (a)Stakeholder satisfaction, (b) Time estimation accuracy, (c) Cost estimation accuracy. H2: Having realistic project assumptions is a PSM CSF that contributes to the success of ICT project in terms of (a)Stakeholder satisfaction, (b) Time estimation accuracy, (c) Cost estimation accuracy. H3: The existence of well-defined project constraints is a PSM CSF that contributes to the success of ICT project in terms of (a) Stakeholder satisfaction, (b) Time estimation accuracy, (c) Cost estimation accuracy. Hypotheses related to the Process dimension: H4: The existence of complete WBS is a PSM CSF that contributes to the success of ICT project in terms of (a) Stakeholder satisfaction, (b) Time estimation accuracy, (c) Cost estimation accuracy. H5: The practice of correct change control procedure is a PSM CSF that contributes to the success of ICT project in terms of (a) Stakeholder satisfaction, (b) Time estimation accuracy, (c) Cost estimation accuracy. Hypotheses related to the People dimension: H6: Having project team that is knowledgeable about the business process is a PSM CSF that contributes to the success of ICT project in terms of (a) Stakeholder satisfaction, (b) Time estimation accuracy, (c) Cost estimation accuracy. H7: The existence of strong stakeholder commitment is a PSM CSF that contributes to the success of ICT project in terms of (a) Stakeholder satisfaction, (b) Time estimation accuracy, (c) Cost estimation accuracy. Regression analysis A stepwise multiple regression was conducted between the three ICT project success dimensions (stakeholder satisfaction, time estimation accuracy and cost estimation accuracy) as the dependent variables and seven underlying PSM success factors as independent variables. TABLE 3 SUMMARY OF OUTCOME FROM STEPWISE MULTIPLE REGRESSION ICT project success dimensions R2 ANOVA Selected variables ÃŽÂ ² value Stakeholder satisfaction 0.614 F(3,527)= 144.3, P Strong stakeholder commitments 0.519 Complete Work breakdown structure 0.227 Well-defined project objective and justification 0.111 Time estimation accuracy 0.451 F(3,527)= 144.3, p Strong stakeholder commitments 0.346 Complete Work breakdown structure 0.318 Well-defined project objective and justification 0.100 Cost estimation accuracy 0.380 F(3,538)= 110.066, p Strong stakeholders commitment 0.390 Well-defined project constraints 0.225 Change control 0.104 Table 3 shows significantly three factors which were strong stakeholders commitment, complete WBS, and well-defined project objective and justification as the CSFs of PSM which contribute to 61.4% variant changes to ICT project success in terms of stakeholder satisfaction. The finding also reveals significantly that the three similar factors, were the CSFs of PSM which contribute to 45.1% variant changes to ICT project success in terms of time estimation accuracy. For the ICT project success in terms of cost estimation accuracy, the result demonstrates significantly that strong stakeholders commitment, change control and well-defined project constraint were the CSFs of PSM which contribute to 38% variant change to ICT project success in terms of cost estimation accuracy. With the above observations, the results of the hypotheses testing can be finalized as follows: out of 21 research hypotheses, a total of 9 hypotheses were supported, while the remaining 12 hypotheses were rejected. Those hypotheses were rejected due to their low coefficient values and high probability level for their corresponding null hypotheses. It means that the presence of those factors did not make a significance difference to the value of ICT project success dimensions. V. CONCLUSION In carrying out this quantitative research, a questionnaire survey method was used to determine the CSFs of PSM which contribute to the ICT project success. ICT project success was investigated in terms of stakeholders satisfaction, time estimation accuracy and cost estimation accuracy. A total of 557 usable data were successfully collected from the respondents who were the public sector ICT professionals. Seven success factors of PSM have been extracted through the factor analysis. The factors were strong stakeholders commitment, complete WBS, well-defined project objective and justification, change control, well-defined project constraints, realistic project assumption and good business knowledge. With the use of stepwise multiple regression analysis, it can be concluded that strong stakeholders commitment, complete WBS and well-defined project objective and justification were the PSM CSFs which contributed to the ICT project success in terms of stakeholders satisfaction and time estimation accuracy. Strong stakeholders commitment, change control and well-defined project constraint were the PSM CSFs which contributed to the ICT project success in terms of cost estimation accuracy. Strong stakeholders commitment factors were the main contribution to the three aspects of ICT project success. Realistic project assumption and project team business knowledge were failed to be proven as th e critical success factor for any aspect of ICT project success. All the critical success factors which have been discovered for each aspect of ICT project success are the main contribution from this research. These factors should be given attention by practitioners while managing ICT project scope so that the project scope that is being managed: 1) could produce deliveries (product, service and results) which successfully give satisfaction to the stakeholders, (2) successfully helps in making time estimation accurately, and (3) successfully helps in making cost estimation accurately.

USEC Capital Budgeting Case Questions

In one paragraph (max 5 sentences), describe the general situation faced by USEC: USEC is the lead supplier of enriched uranium, which is used to fuel nuclear reactors. Due to an expiring contract with a power supplier, the production of Uranium fuel became very expensive at the current Paducah plant. USEC created a new plant called APC in an attempt to advance technology and become the low cost producers in the Uranium industry. Mackovjak is a financial analyst tasked with the evaluation of USEC. In order to properly value USEC, Mackovjak needs to evaluate APC and their contributions to USEC.2) What is the Weighted Average Cost of Capital for USEC in July 2006? (Assume the expected return on the market is around 11%)WACC= .10703We calculated a = .134 which we calculated using the expected return equation: . Our equation looked similar to this: For the equity we assumed the number of shares outstanding for 2006 which was 86.1 million *10.8 (price per share) 930 million The debt was g iven in the capital market conditions at 475 million (making D+E equal 1405 million) For we used the yield to maturity, which was given at 0.0904 The tax rate was estimated based on the 2005 data to be roughly 40 percent.3) After determining the relevant Cash Flows for the project, what is the NPV? *FCF were calculated in the excel spreadsheetWe were using a $20 fixed price due to an agreement for the Uranium however this changed as the agreement expired and we were required to buy Uranium at market price. Sales= (Production *SWU price)Cash Costs= (Production of APC* Market price )+ (Production of APC* Enrichment costs) *When APC became functional, enrichment costs were reduced by half Non Cash Costs= DepreciationCurrent assets= production* inventory (this was only used in 2012) Market price* production (was used for 2013 and after) Current liabilities= 1 % of DOE for initial research of centrifuge technology Net working capital= current assets – current liabilities (we found the change in Networking capital) Operating cash flow= S-C(1-T)+TDChanged in fixed asset= capital expenditureWe used these values to calculate a future cash flow using the equation: FCF= operating cash flow -increase in networking capital -increase in fixed assets.In order to find the NPV of the project we took the FCF from ACP alone. We had to recognize that the lease on Paducah was not associated with ACP, however a one percent royalty was added to current liabilities on the ACP projecting. In order to check our initial estimation we compared the networking capital of the APC project to 5% of sales that was recommended by another analyst Craig Weise. Every year the value was positive and above 5% reinforcing our decision that USEC will take on the project. Based on our calculated NPV of the project we determined that APC would return 2,020,167,627 dollars.The cost of the project is 1.7 billion so the difference in return and cost is a positive 320,167,627 dollars. Thus USEC will take on the project and therefore the company is undervalued. Mackovjak, the financial analyst, seeing that the company is undervalued should pitch to upper management they should take a long position in USEC.From the syllabus: â€Å"Write-ups should be self-contained Word documents, running 2-3 pages or less, including exhibits. Separate spreadsheets containing original calculations should be attached to the email, but exhibits should be placed within the Word document, not left to be found somewhere in the spreadsheet.† Please conform to these exhibition expectations in future write-ups. As to your spreadsheet:For Paducah, the CFs shown would be irrelevant, as â€Å"with ACP, Paducah operates in 2006-2010, and without ACP, Paducah operates in 2006-2010†, so Paducah CFs irrelevant to ACP valuation in 2006-2010. But necessary to estimate from 2006-2010, so that when lost 2011-2025, Paducah CFs are  already escalated and easily estimable. In that regard, all CFs to th e NPV calc are too high as you have included irrelevant 2006-2010 CFs for Paducah, but more importantly, have ignored all Paducah CFs lost from 2011-2025 as suggested by the case comments given in class the prior day to case discussion.Further, your Paducah OCF format of (S-C)(1-T)+TD should only contain cash costs in â€Å"C† and your spreadsheet shows that â€Å"C† contains Capital Expenditures. Capital Expenditures is ALWAYS outside of OCF, with (S-C)(1-T)+TD – ChgNWC – Yearly CapEx., which you do, thus effectively double deducting for CapEx. You did not return NWC at the end of the project.For ACP, Uranium Costs are basically ZERO in your valuation after 2012. This error SEVERELY underestimates costs, and overestimates FCF and thus NPV. Further, in your â€Å"double 2011† method, a Uranium cost of $21? Where is this from? For Depreciation in ACP, you are using Depreciation for Paducah (Old), not the Capitalized Plant Bldg costs. Further, your a nalysis does not seem to include the $1.7b cost anywhere, other than in the text of this document where you apparently take a t=0 PVCF and subtract amounts that sum to $1.7b, but occur across 5 years (thus ignoring discounting of the capital costs, and including 100m of a sunk cost in your NPV). Finally, your methodology of PV’g does not use the spreadsheet effectively. As with any hard number entry, if you wanted to change this, you would have a significant task ahead of you.Please think about using functions, or at the very least using equations that refer to a single cell containing WACC, and sequential cells containing 1,2,3, etc. for â€Å"T†. Overall, a submission with many errors; some to be expected, and some that appear to be unexplained or work potentially done too quickly without review. I would very much suggest that you use FAR fewer hard numbers in the spreadsheet calculations, and layout more of the assumed values as separate cell entries (the tax rate, the UrRawMatls quantity, the SunkCost, the WACC). If you ever had to go back and change some of these things, it is far easier to change one cell than try to remember ALL cells that contained the hard number entry.

Li & Fung Introduction

Introduction: â€Å"Globalization†, the word everybody has heard of and which Is literally spread everywhere. Either In school, university or In the news. People are constantly discussing about this term and its consequences. But what does globalization actually mean? There are thousands of deflations and It Is hard to find one which covers all areas of globalization. In short words Globalization considers the process of the world becoming more and more interdependent and linked concerning politics, economy, environment and technology. It is not possible anymore to see our economy as a single unit.Instead the whole world is connected and linked through cash or trading flows or commodities that are being shipped for instance from Hong Kong to the US. This process has significantly influenced multinational companies and their strategic development in order to gain more wealth and growth from an international point of view. In the following assignment I am going to analyses the i nternationalization strategy of Lie & Fun, a Hong Kong based multinational company which targets on a unique supply- chain management system and also covers logistics.We span a range of such as toys, home furnishings, sporting goods, footwear, and health and beauty products. Our services cover all aspects of the supply chain from product design, raw material sourcing and production management to quality control, logistics, and shipping. We operate one of the world's most extensive global networks across our trading and logistics businesses. More than 28,000 colleagues work across some 300 offices and distribution centers in more than 40 different markets. We have access to a sourcing network encompassing over 1 5,000 suppliers around the world.The Trading business provides sourcing services to retailers, brand owners and wholesalers to support their brands on both an agency (commission margin) and a principal (product margin) basis. It also offers design and products to retailers on a wholesale basis. The Logistics business is a leading player for logistics in distinct verticals across Greater China and Southeast Asia, and interacts with our trading business to provide comprehensive in-country logistics solutions and international freight forwarding services. )

The War Of The Great Depression - 1019 Words

WWI was a war that devastated millions. The causes of this war, and any war, are important to study because they greatly impact the future. Studying the war allows the future generations to learn from mistakes. The nations that fought in the war include: Russia, Great Britain, France, and Austria-Hungary. The nations were affected by the cost of war, and the deaths. WWI launched the great depression. WWI started in 1914 and ended in 1918. The effects of the war had a tremendous affect on the nations. The most significant causes of WWI were: Nationalism, Imperialism, and Militarism. Nationalism is, in the simplest of words, pride in your nation. Although, it goes deeper than simply being proud of who you are and where you are.†¦show more content†¦This brings to light that not only does nationalism have to do with the nation, but it also has to do with divine right. Divine right is the idea that God has chosen deliberately for someone or something to rule over everything. The idea of divine right provides a sense of legitimacy for whoever, or in this case whatever, claims it. Additionally, If the nationalist nation feels as if they are under the power of God, they will be much more obliged to attack whoever opposes them. Especially if they feel that you are offending their God. Pride in one’s nation along with divine right is a definite cause of war because it causes anger and frustration. Imperialism is the act of extending a country’s power and influence through diplomatic or military means. Imperialism is best explained as a virus in the human body. The virus being the imperialist nation, and the body’s immune system being the army of the homeland. The virus wants to invade the body successfully and in order to do that it has to attack the body. The Virus can either disguise itself and go in peacefully working out a way to stay, or it can attack the body directly and make you sick. Sickness, in this case, is success by the imperialist virus. Imperialism fueled World War I because it caused certain nations to crave more land. Imperialist nations are the cause of war because they