Get Full Access to this Case Solution NowUnlock Case Solution
Project Execution Dilemma at MICC case study discusses the plight of Mid-India Construction Private Company Limited (MICC) in the implementation of a refurbishing project. The project's progress was slow and the project manager was fearing that the project would not be completed on time (eight months). It looks into the possible parallel work-fronts that they could work on to hasten the completion of the whole project.
Hasmukh Gajjar and Bhavin J. Shah
Harvard Business Review (W14566-PDF-ENG)
November 11, 2014
Case questions answered:
- What problems did MICC face in the execution of the refurbishing project (RP)? What could the possible causes be?
- What could be the consequences of ad-hoc project planning be to various stakeholders?
- How would you plan for a typical work-front of 2,000 square meters (m2) external surface area and 1743 m2 internal surface area? (Hint: use Exhibit 3 and Exhibit 5 data)
- Explore various alternatives for putting projects on the fast track using the nature of the project site and project work? What could be the financial and operational implications of putting the project on the fast track be?
- Given a choice, how would you have planned the project differently?
Not the questions you were looking for? Submit your own questions & get answers.
Case answers for Project Execution Dilemma at MICC
This case solution includes an Excel file with calculations.
1. What problems did MICC face in the execution of the refurbishing project (RP)? What could the possible causes be?
The main problem that MICC faced in the execution of the refurbishing project was clarity on the use of the scaffolding and the lack of a clear schedule. This can be seen in the case of the internal painting work, which has no relation to the external work. Hence this could have been started parallelly with the external surface work without the 1month delay.
A cost-benefit analysis should have been done wrt the scaffolding. A clear plan should have been made in order to get optimal usage of the scaffolding. The surface has been divided into 14 work fronts. A Gantt chart should have followed this with the schedule.
MICC was bidding for 7 more projects and was sure that it would get 2 more. Hence it might have been keeping a certain amount of resources in standby so that it can easily deploy them to the new project as and when it is assigned to them. In addition to this, the company had 4 other projects running parallel to the RP. Hence, the company’s resources will be divided so that one project is not done at the expense of the other.
Interest expenses have grown more than double since 2010. Since they are already borrowing funds to do the RP, the management at MICC will want to keep expenses to a minimum by deploying only minimal resources. The assumption might have been that even with lesser resources allocated, the productivity would not drop.
Gantt chart based on Exhibits 3 and 5
2. What could be the consequences of ad-hoc project planning be to various stakeholders?
The impact of ad-hoc planning are:
- The first whole month was wasted without starting the interior painting work as this had no relation to the stone removal process based on exhibit 1.
- The initial plan had no distinction between the internal and external work.
- The optimal use of the scaffolding was not planned, and the cost-benefit analysis of parallel scaffolding was not carried out as well.
- No analysis was done to find out if the project could be completed with the 2,000 square meters (m2) scaffolding. MICC was not willing to spend the additional INR 1.5 million.
- This inefficient planning will also lead to a demoralizing atmosphere to the project customers leading them to lose faith.
3. How would you plan for a typical work-front of 2,000 square meters (m2) external surface area and 1743 m2 internal surface area? (Hint: use Exhibit 3 and Exhibit 5 data)
Exhibit 3 shows that it takes 16 days for stone removal from a 2000m2 area, and for 14 such work fronts, it takes…
Unlock Case Solution Now!
Get instant access to this case solution with a simple, one-time payment ($24.90).
- You'll be redirected to the full case solution.
- You will receive an access link to the solution via email.