Posts
I recall a CBT project that was riddled with scope creep issues. An organization wanted to convert a large portion of their training into CBT but had no one on their staff had a background in development. The team I was working with at the time was selected to begin this project. Due to the many points that this customer wanted to cover in the first meeting, the five member team was requested to be present. The meeting was being hosted by the client, so we went with their request. Shortly after the meeting the client accepted our recommendation and asked us to being the work. To keep this from being a PowerPoint presentation we requested to sit in on the classes before beginning development. After two weeks we were ready to begin the analysis of the first class. During the analysis phase we were approached about making some changes to the class. We explained that changes to the class would change the timeline set for the project’s completion. As well as add to the development cost. This was agreeable so we took the changes just before starting our design phase. This was a short one day class therefore we could complete this with 280 to 300 development hours per hour of class. During the development our client wanted to re-think their changes and maybe not include all of them. At the same time there was a request to reduce cost where ever we could. At this point these issues were major to the completion of our project. Our project manager requested a meeting with the client and our CEO. The problem here was the SOW had been agreed upon and modified once to meet the needs of the client. Now the client wants to change the objectives again and have us reduce cost. The project manager wanted to explain that by changing the objectives the client was increasing cost. The project was put on hold until the client and senior management could work out the details of a new contract. This process took six week to complete.
In looking back I believe the project was started in the wrong environment. Instead of meeting with the entire team I would have asked the client to first meet with the key stakeholders. In this meeting I would have set the guidelines for the project and explain the importance of the client understanding what went into developing CBT from conventional instructions. I would have covered how the ADDIE process worked and what it meant to change the objectives in the process. All cost would have been set before starting the project with the understanding that any changes made by the client after the start date would could increase the cost of the project. I believe that covering these items beforehand would have minimized the request of the client. Since the client didn’t know what went into making these changes, how would they know it affected the graphic artist, the media designer, and a host of others? I think when the timeline was being set with the client, the type of delays should have been built into the project. As it was covered in chapter 11 of out text (Project Management), “The most common result of scope creep is an upset client who was not (or claims not to have been) told how long the change delays the project and how much it raises the project cost”. (P. 346)
Change in a project is an expectation in project management. Setting up a formal method to handle these changes minimizes stress that comes alone with it.
Reference: Portny, S., Mantel, S., Meredith, J., Shafer, S., Sutton, M., & Kramer, B. (2008). Project management: Planning, scheduling, and controlling projects. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
