Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Atek Case Study - Group 4 - Coggle Diagram
Atek Case Study - Group 4
Timeline
In late 2006 AtekPC creates a PMO (project management office) as part of its Strategic Planning Office to improve efficiency.
October 2006, Mark Nelson joins as PMO manager to assist in IT projects.
Debate over how heavily PMO will be integrated within IT March 2007.
Problems
Unclear PMO Role and Authority
Who is responsible?
Project managers
AtekPC
How did it impact the organization?
Unable to meet deadlinnes
Unable to resolve problems the department were facing
Assigning other PMOs to other projects
New PMOs were slow to develop
How did it impact the IT group?
There were shortage of PMO experts resources available to support projects
What is the consequence?
Limited IT projects
ability to utilize resources
How did it happen?
The PC industry wanting to reduce cost
What is the cause?
To establish the office and prove it value
To realize the benefits derived from consistent project practices
Why does the problem exist?
Uncompleted consensensus
There were no documentation and plans
Limited PMO resources
Cultural Resistance to Change
Who is responsible?
Senior IT Managers for encouraging a slow strategy to show the effectiveness of the PMO through smaller areas of scope to show value.
How did it impact the organization?
The organization would need to adapt to a change as they were not currently held accountable for measuring the benefits of their projects.
How did it impact the IT group?
The IT group would have to shift from an informal model that excluded the need for things like cost tracking.
What is the consequence?
There was an overwhelming number of people who opposed a PMO.
How did it happen?
The organization was used to a model that lacked consistent processes and standardization.
What is the cause?
Many of the staff and managers had little to no experience with formal PM practices.
Why does the problem exist?
Senior Management had no consensus into what degree the PMO impacted in changing processes.
PMO-Heavy vs. PMO-Light Debate
Who is responsible?
The PMO and their performance as an example for future PMO use
Upper management (setting example for others)
Employees involved in resisting or participating in the culture the PMO is creating
How did it impact the organization?
There is a cultural resistance to change / focus on change relating to the PMO dividing the views on it throughout the company
How did it impact the IT group?
The IT group is the "Pilot" of the PMO so they are under scrutiny for their implementation
The result of the decision will mean IT will be placed in a position with a shortage of resources(light PMO) or face cultural difficulties (heavy PMO)
What is the consequence?
Light PMO prevents the PMO from demonstrating their worth at the company.
In terms of keeping up with the pace of technology - slower PM methods risk putting AtekPC behind
With PMO heavy it would strain resources/stretch personnel thin
and to implement heavily would sacrifice other departments for the success of the PMO
How did it happen?
Lack of education regarding what the PMO light vs. heavy actually is
The company has faced hardship with the PC market maturing and is facing pressure of buyouts as a smaller company
Departments tend to be siloed and was previously very informal so the formal approach is new and unpopular with some
What is the cause?
Employees are either confused about the purpose of the PMO or tend to lean either way - resources vs. innovation of the company
The PMO is viewed as bureaucratic / culturally opposing views
Why does the problem exist?
Some members of the organization view the PMO as a "roadblock" and a potential strain on already scarce resources
Some members of the organization view the PMO as a way to move the company forward
The application of the PMO is seen as too broad to some individuals
Relevant Facts
AtekPC is a mid-sized PC manufacturer facing significant industry challenges shrinking profit margins, industry consolidation, and new competition.
Historically, the IT department has managed projects informally.
A Project Management Office (PMO) was established to improve efficiency but has encountered resistance.
The company’s culture leans towards rapid action rather than formalized processes. Lead analysts managed project within their teams without standardized practices.
The PMO has executive backing but limited formal authority.
Current practices are inefficient and unsustainable for larger more complex projects.
Solutions
Implement a Lightweight PMO
Pros: Less resistance from teams, as it allows flexibility. Easier to implement with fewer resources. Encourages a culture of collaboration rather than enforcement.
Cons: Weaker authority may lead to inconsistent project management. May not fully address the need for strategic alignment. Risk of being underutilized or ignored.
Hybrid Approach (Phase Implemented)
Pros: Balances control and flexibility. Reduces resistance by easing into the transition. Allows adjustments based on feedback and organizational needs.
Cons:Longer timeline to achieve full impact. Requires continuous stakeholder management. Potential for confusion during transition periods.
Implement a Heavyweight PMO
Pros: Strong control over project management practices. Improved project tracking, accountability, and alignment with business strategy. Clear authority and structured decision-making.
Cons: High resistance from employees and managers. Requires significant resources and executive support. Could slow down projects with bureaucracy.
Stakeholders
John Strider (CIO)
Mark Nelson (PMO Manager)
Richard Steinberg (Director of Application Development)
Larry Field (Director of Application Development)
Steven Gardner (Manufacturing Systems Manager)
Managers & IT Staff