W14_APE_Review of Simatupang2014 Class Performance in Week W6 Progress


  1. Problem Definition

Part of class contract deliverables to DR Paul as our Client From Hell is providing weekly progress report. On this report it shows class and individual performance with boundary limit CPI and SPI value of 0.8. Less then this value the consequence will be dismissed from class. It appears that the trend line of these two indicators is not good until week W6 while we claimed ourselves on week W1 as “PERFORMING GROUP STAGE” using Tuckman tools[1]. In this blog i will try to assess my group condition based on task unit approach.

Figure 1

 Figure 1. SimatupangAACE2014 Class with DR Paul Giammalvo as the Mentor

  1. Identify the Feasible Alternative

Where we are now ? CPI and SPI trendline shows that this class is facing serious problem[2]:

Figure 2

Figure 2. CPI and SPI Simatupang2014 Value From Week W0 until W6

It shows that CPI and SPI trendline is going down in every week and crashed the boundary limit value in week W5 and W6. It is necessary to find the problem areas for forming solutions.

  1. Development of the Outcome for Alternative

Previously i made simple task unit table and sent it to my collegues for review. It is simple calculation assuming that each deliverable treated as one unit:

  • For Sim_01 & Sim _03 each week we have to deliver one unit of personnel weekly report and one unit of blog. So for 20 weeks equal to 20 tasks unit blogs + 20 tasks unit weekly reports
  • For Sim_02, 04, 06 & 07 there are some percentage placed in every week. One task unit is each percentage value for correspond week. For example Sim_05, we have 10% select and submit topic in week W1 until W2 equal with one unit task value of 5% in week W1 and one task value of 5% in week W2 and so on
  • For Sim_05 there are explicit number of questions for each member divided into week periods. For instance i had 28 questions for Engineering Economy equal with 28 tasks unit and so on

Total task unit for Simatupang2014 class is 1758 or 147-148 tasks unit per member except MAY due to paper de-scope from early class programme. Class should pay attention start from week W11 since we will have significant ramp up deliverables task unit.

Figure 3a

 Figure 3b

Figure 3. Simatupang2014 Class Weekly Deliverable Task Unit

For progress until week W6 i compare deliverable contract with actual and mapping in each task present in Figure 4:

Figure 4a

 Figure 4b

 Figure 4. Simatupang2014 Class Deliverable Task Unit Until Week W6

It shows that we only deliver 85% from our obligation until week W6 and we didn’t deliver 35 tasks unit in following four weeks [week W3 until W6], with two weak points foreseen for Sim_03 and Sim_04 tasks.

  1. Selection Criteria

Using above exercise group performance analysis can be obtained relevant with their stage and forming solutions.

  1. Analysis and Comparison of the Alternative

If i comeback to Figure 4 and perform deviation calculation between contract and actual delivery, i can show to my collegues where is our delay in previous week in task section present in Figure 5:

 Figure 5

Figure 5. Actual Minus Contract Deliverables Until Week W6

Figure 5 shows delay contribution from each member in correspond week and finally map these delays into task to see which task has the most delay today. For instance i had contribute one delay for task unit in week W3 and 2 units in week W6 from my 1st draft and so on. We also could see which member who has consistently for delay contribution for penalty consideration. Plotting this delay into task show us that the most delay is in Sim_04 and we can see which members facing heavy task for next week for managers monitoring purpose. From this exercise we can calculate our load [team and personnel] for week W7 as present in Figure 6:

 Figure 6

Figure 6. Forecast Task Unit for Week W7

Figure 6 shows challenging task for next week W7 [double task loads]. Last question in my head will be team performance stage. I had summarize team members respond which end into STORMING stage[3] & [4] even less three members didn’t respond this survey [the probability for STORMING stage incorporate these members is 53% from my own exercise], compare with previous survey in week W1 when eight members provided answers which lead into PERFORMING stage. 

 Figure 7

 Figure 7. Tuckman Survey Comparison Week W1 and W6

 

  1. Selection of the Preferred Alternative

I have summarised my review for class performances in week W6 as follows:

  • We have under performance team problem until week W6
  • The most problem task is Sim_04 when all members facing difficulty for paper submission in time. Other problem area is blog task
  • Current Simatupang2014 class stage is STORMING stage  
  1. Performance Monitoring and the Post Evaluation of Result

I have formed some suggestions for my collegues:

  • Provide buffer blog as much as possible. This is the ticket for buying paper time. Using simple blog topic and serial tools is the most easiest way to do [IRR/ERR/NPV/Breakeven serial topic or available tools from chapter 14 Engineering Economy book]. Team assistance for blog could be an option and subject for discussion
  • Working late for behind members and for paper deliverable [no option]
  • De-scope paper deliverable. This is the right time for personnel assessment considering many conditions
  • Catch paper deliverable [no option]
  • Dismissed the most delay member [no option]
  • PLAN WHAT YOU DO AND DO WHAT YOU PLAN

References

[1]Simatupang2014 AACE Class. (2013). Tuckman Survey Result for Week W1. Jakarta, Indonesia.

[2]Simatupang2014 AACE Class. (2013). Weekly Report Week W1 until W6. Jakarta, Indonesia.

[3]CSCAWEB.org. (2012). Survey: what stage is Your Team In ?. Retrieved from http://www.cscaweb.org/EMS/sector_team/support_files/tools_for_the_team/tool_stage.pdf.

[4]Project-management-skills.com. (2012). Teamwork Theory: Stages of Group Development. Retrieved from http://www.project-management-skills.com/teamwork-theory.html.

Advertisements

1 Comment

Filed under Arif P, Week 14

One response to “W14_APE_Review of Simatupang2014 Class Performance in Week W6 Progress

  1. AWESOME analysis, Pak Arif!!! Very impressive and detailed analysis AND you included ACTION ITEMS necessary to correct the problem…..

    NOW, I am looking to each project manager and to our program manager to ENFORCE THE CONTRACT. If you start to ignore the contracts, by your actions, you are essentially creating a change order……

    Now, who is going to be the first to step forward and either help those who are behind to catch up (remember if you help someone who is behind with a blog posting, BOTH of you can claim credit) or you need to start writing those warning letters putting people on notice that they need to catch up or risk being removed from the team. (And for those who ARE removed, they can rejoin another class provided they do so within one year of dropping out)

    Now it is Thursday, so let’s see some positive movement on those action items in the coming 48 hours.

    BR,
    Dr. PDG, Jakarta

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s