Question

Ferris HealthCare,

Inc.

In July of 1999, senior management at Ferris recognized that its future growth

could very well be determined by how quickly and how well it implemented proj-

ect management. For the past several years, line managers had been functioning

as project managers while still managing their line groups. The projects came out

with the short end of the stick, most often late and over budget, because managers

focused on line activities rather than project work. Everyone recognized that proj-

ect management needed to be an established career path position and that some

structured process had to be implemented for project management.

A consultant was brought into Ferris to provide initial project management

training for 50 out of the 300 employees targeted for eventual project manage-

ment training. Several of the employees thus trained were then placed on a com-

mittee with senior management to design a project management stage-gate model

for Ferris.

After two months of meetings, the committee identified the need for three

different stage-gate models: one for information systems, one for new products/

services provided, and one for bringing on board new corporate clients. There

were several similarities among the three models. However, personal interests

dictated the need for three methodologies, all based upon rigid policies and

procedures.

After a year of using three models, the company recognized it had a problem

deciding how to assign the right project manager to the right project. Project man-

agers had to be familiar with all three methodologies. The alternative, considered

5

6 FERRIS HEALTHCARE, INC.

impractical, was to assign only those project managers familiar with that specific

methodology.

After six months of meetings, the company consolidated the three method-

ologies into a single methodology, focusing more upon guidelines than on poli-

cies and procedures. The entire organization appeared to support the new singu-

lar methodology. A consultant was brought in to conduct the first three days of a

four-day training program for employees not yet trained in project management.

The fourth day was taught by internal personnel with a focus on how to use the

new methodology. The success to failure ratio on projects increased dramatically.

QUESTIONS

1. Why was it so difficult to develop a singular methodology from the start?

2. Why were all three initial methodologies based on policies and procedures?

3. Why do you believe the organization later was willing to accept a singular

methodology?

4. Why was the singular methodology based on guidelines rather than policies

and procedures?

5. Diditmakesensetohavethefourthdayofthetrainingprogramdevotedtothe

methodology and immediately attached to the end of the three-day program?

6. Why was the consultant not allowed to teach the methodology?

Answer 1

1). It is so much difficult to develop a singular methodology from the start because it was so difficult where the employees were not at all trained and not acknowledged based on any one methodology.

2). All three methodologies were based on policies and procedures. Because that where the only standard that new products, information systems, and the new corporate-level clients are in common and these were followed the same and used because everyone is completely aware of the policies and procedures and access to the references.

3). After the initial terms, I believe that the organization later was willing to accept a singular methodology, because it is not at all possible for any organization or the success in doing business operations by utilizing the three different methodologies. It had to be very chaotic. Moreover, the company has the complete authority and right to decide the right project manager for the right kind of project.

4). In companies, the singular methodologies based on guidelines rather than the policies and procedures. These are like every new beginning of the company, it used the policies and procedures as a roadmap for the three methodologies it was using. Because, they probably thought these as the right way in the sort of three methodologies in the organization, later in the stages, the company realized the strategies are not working and changed it to use one methodology. After that, the employees are trained based on one methodology and everyone is using guidelines of the methodology instead of the policies and procedures.

5). Yes, off-course it made sense to have the fourth day of the training program devoted to the methodology and immediately attached to the end of the three-day program. It is very important to employee for learning the new methodology especially (since because the old three methodologies didn’t work). In order to make the company successful, the employees have to be properly groomed, trained, practice, and comfortable completely with the new culture and methodology.

6). The consultant is not allowed to teach or train the methodology, because the role of the consultant is to train employees for the project management skills, and the core skill of the consultant is concentrated on that. After the new methodology developed internally, the internal employee could have knowledge and skill to train the employees on the newly created methodology.