Common interests between the stakeholders

3587 words (14 pages) Essay

1st Jan 1970 Management Reference this

Disclaimer: This work has been submitted by a university student. This is not an example of the work produced by our Essay Writing Service. You can view samples of our professional work here.

Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of UKEssays.com.

In 2009, Logilink received a new project to handle the logistics arrangement of cement between Spain and Algeria. Our client, KDM Company was assigned by the government to supply the cement to build the new highway between Algiers and Constantine in Algeria. This project has a big impact in the economical and the political side, therefore the government of Algeria has assigned KDM to supply the cement in 6 months period of time. Logilink as a logistics firm had to ensure the proper transportation of cement from refinery at Spain to Algerian port. During the 6 months period, we have arranged with KDM to transport 48,000MT of cement per month to fulfill the total quantity required for this project.

Get Help With Your Essay

If you need assistance with writing your essay, our professional essay writing service is here to help!

Find out more

4.STAKEHOLDERS

Logilink assigned our Project Manager Mr. Javier, to be in charge of this project. With the support of our CEO and shareholders, he selected the team to work with. The team comprised of five employees; Mr. Nilo the Ship Controller, Mr. Ziani the Finance Analyst, Miss Juan the Admin Assistant, Mr. Jose the Project Office Manager and me as the Operation Manager. To ensure smooth execution of this project, the functional teams within Logilink were instructed by the CEO to collaborate with Mr. Javier and provide him with all the resources required.

The groups, persons, organizations and institutions related to the building and running of the new highway or which is in its area of influence is registered or inventoried by means of brain storming. (Appendix1)

The team defined the stakeholders for this project by identifying organizations that had responsibilities or may affect the process and who had the influence over the new highway project.

List of stakeholders:

The evaluation of the project’s environmental impact corresponds to the

Association of Environment (APE)

The authorizing body for the project was the Ministry of Public Works

Logilink was responsible for shipping, maritime traffic and safety

The supplier of Cement was Repsol

The government sole distributor for cement in this project was KDM.

The construction was handled by private entrepreneurs

Bank (Societe General)

Media

Local transport companies.

Local supplies companies.

Stakeholders’ interests, project impact level and priority in relation to other stakeholders are identified in table1.

Table 1: Stakeholders interests and impacts table

Interests

Potential project impact

Relative priorities of interest

Secondary

Stakeholders

Ministry of public works

– Achievement of targets

– Control over funds

– Political image

+

2

Entrepreneurs

-Profits

– Achievement of targets

-reputation

+/-

+

+/-

1

Media

– Profits

– Supply information to the public.

+/-

3

Bank

Societe Generale

– Profits

+

3

Association Of Environment (APE)

– habitat destruction

-Environmental degradation

?

3

Local transport companies.

– Profits

– liabilities

+/-

+

2

Local supplies companies

– profits

– Liabilities

+/-

+

2

Primary

Stakeholders

KDM co.ltd

– Profits

– Achievement of targets

– Liability (avoid at all costs)

-Reputation

+/-

+

+/-

1

Project Manager

– Promotion

-Rewards

+

+

1

Repsol (Supplier)

-Profits

– Gain Algerian Market

+/-

+/-

1

Team members

– rewards and bonuses

– promotions

-expand skill level

+

?

+

2

During the process of strategic management, attention to stakeholders is important since the success and survival for public organizations relies on fulfilling key stakeholders according to their description of what is precious. (Bryson 1995: 27; Moore 1995).

As an alternative, many individual groups and organizations are occupied or have partial liability to act. Discovering what the predicament is and finding solutions are part of the problem while taking stakeholders into relation is an important criterion of problem solving. (Bryson and Crosby 1992; Bardach 1998)(pb-bryson)

To identify common interests between the stakeholders, the planning team had to find the relationship between the stakeholders to find the typical strategy where individual stakeholders will think that their own interests are advanced. (Andreasen 1995; Kotler, Roberto, and Lee 2002)

For example, KDM’s interest was to show efficiency and gain Algerian government’s trust. They will increase profit and obtain more contracts. KDM’s interest matched with our interest since we were a booming company searching for reputation rather than just making profit.

The government wanted to complete the project on time with high quality in order for them to be more credible in the eye of the public. From the side of Repsol, their interest is to gain maximum profit which matches the entrepreneur’s goals.

The stakeholder-issue interrelationship diagram explains how the planning team determined the relationship between the stakeholders through their common objectives.

Figure 1 Stakeholder-Issue Interrelationship Diagram (Bryant, 2003)

Political image and credibility

Supply information for the public

Habitat destruction and environmental degradation

Control over funds

Entrepreneurs

Ministry of public works

Association Of Environme

Media

Societe Generale

Achievement of targets

Profits

Reputation

Liabilities

Local supplies companies

Local transport companies

Repsol

Logilink co.ltd

KDM co.ltd

It was necessary for our project team to analyze the stakeholders. We investigated each stakeholder, by knowing their powers, weaknesses, forces and threats (calvert 1995).

Wideman (1998) suggests that the analysis should start by grouping stakeholders based on the influence.

The influence level differs between stakeholders; it depends on the hierarchical relationship to the project. The government had a high level of influence compared to other secondary stakeholders which influences were lower as the project was just an opportunity to achieve goals. (Source: Wideman 1998, p. 219)

KDM as the most important stakeholder had an influence on the project. If they weren’t satisfied they could stop the project. The Ministry of Public Works had a concern to the public sector so their influence was the highest.

The environmental association could also oppose the project. Nevertheless, they didn’t have a great degree of representation or the capacity for mobilizing people, so they had considerable degree of importance, but not influence.

Logilink didn’t have excessive importance due to low amount of competences that could affect the project. However, given their representation and capacity to mobilize, they were very influential. The same is true for entrepreneurs.

Local supply and transport companies had positive effect on the project execution which resulted in low importance and influence as they represented a small segment of the population.

Figure2. Classification of importance and influence of stakeholders affected by the New Highway project (Backoff and Nutt, 1992)

KDMImportance

Logilink

Entrepreneurs

LTC + LSC

Repsol

Ministry of public works

Media

Societe Generale

Association Of Environment

Influence

Mr. Javier designed a plan to increase support and minimize oppositions from the project stakeholders (Source: PMI 2004), after identifying stakeholders’ process and classifying the stakeholders by their geographic location and interest in the project. The strategy defined the level of participation desired by key stakeholders. The planning team interviewed key stakeholders individually, to ensure everyone’s genuine support to the project. If support is lacking, they discussed and resolved obstructing issues.

Find out how UKEssays.com can help you!

Our academic experts are ready and waiting to assist with any writing project you may have. From simple essay plans, through to full dissertations, you can guarantee we have a service perfectly matched to your needs.

View our services

The treatment regarding communication and participation differed between stakeholders. The planning team arranged for each key stakeholder depending on interest level and the choice to be involved in all phases or in specific phases of the project.

KDM wanted to be involved in all phases of the project. Our project team arranged a weekly meeting with KDM and updated them by sending reports for each shipment. The Ministry of Public Works just wanted to be informed when the project was completed. The stakeholder management strategy used for the project was adequate to satisfy each key stakeholder and avoid any resistance to the project’s process.

5. Organisational structure

The organizational structure in our company defer from one project to another, in our new highway project the company used a project team organizational structure, due to its importance and complexity. This project required specialists to work on it full time as the due time of the project was too tight.

The company head office allocated Mr.Javier as project manager; the team of the project took a functional oriented structure form (Cleland 1999)

Figure3.Dedicated project team (Gray & Larson 2000)

Human Resources

Finance and administration

Ship Controller

Logilink co. ltd

Project Directors

Project Manager2

Project Manger 1

Team 1

Team 2

Sales and Marketing

 

Figure 3 shows the feature of our new project team. The team consists of the following; Mr. Nilo the Ship Controller, Mr. Ziani the Project Accountant, Miss Juan the Admin Assistant, MR.Jose the Project Office Manager and me as the Operation Manager. To execute this project efficiently, the functional teams within Logilink were instructed by the Head Office to join forces with Mr. Javier and provide him with all the resources required.

The importance of the project and its amplitude for success were the mean factors that determined the project team. All team members had a big experience in such project and knew how to deal with it in such short time.

The company applied this structure as project team structure allows the project team to work independently. The team consecrated full time for the project rather than being disrupted by other obligations or duties with their mean functional departments,

Although he had to report to senior executives in the parent organization, Mr Javier had the full authority over the project.

After utilizing this structure, we gained faster response time since most decisions were made within the team and were not differed up the hierarchy.

With proper direction, the project team worked together and was fully committed only on maximizing the project’s success while disregarding their area of expertise. Gray and Larson (2000),

Figure4. Projectized Organization (Source: PMI 2004)

In the project management consulting work, they identified a list of characteristics that many project managers have offered as successful characteristics in their core teams. For the most part, these characteristics are observed in individuals based on their experiences and the testimony of those who have worked with them. Typically these are not characteristics whereby the presence or absence in an individual is determined through interviews (Klassen and McLaughlin, 1993).

The roles and responsibilities of the project ream depend of the nature of the project itself and the level of power and capacities.

In the planning and resourcing process the project team was identified, so the team remained involved throughout the project and the resources from other groups were used when it was required.

6. Roles, responsibilities and relationships of project team members

After identifying the goals of the project and determining the resources needed, the head office discovered that they require a Project Manager with a lot of experience and knowledge for this particular project. Mr. Javier who is the existing Project Director in our firm was selected to be the Project Manager. His role was to ensure the implementation and success of the project as he had control over all project resources.

The roles and responsibilities of each team member were as follow:

– As the Project Office Manager, Mr. Jose’s responsibilities were to control and track the detailed plan, manage documentation and prepare various reports.

– As the Project Accountant, Mr. Ziani had to deal with procurement, sub-contractor expenditure, joint venture accounting, monitor progress tracking and handle financial reporting.

– As the Ship Coordinator, Mr. Nilo was responsible for the administrative aspects of the ship and served as the associate between our company and the client.

– As an Admin Assistant, Ms. Juan was a specialist in the creation of accurate usable documentation – both for the daily usage of the solution and as design documentation for future reference.

-As the Operation Manager, I handled the way the live technical solution should be operated. Operating procedures would include routine operations, controls, security, backup/recovery and disaster plans (Simon, 2004).

The organizational chart is an illustrative display of project reporting relationships (Kerzner, 2003). In our organization, the reporting relationships were informal due to the small size of the team. Our Project Manager was responsible for the creation of a WBS that mapped our assigned project to this organizational breakdown structure.

To present the reporting relationships within the project context, the company designed the organizational breakdown structure in a way to show who the project is functionally organized and to describe the hierarchy and organizations that supplied resources to arrange and to transmit the work identified in the work breakdown structure (WBS) (Kerzner, 2003).

Figure5.Illustrates our organizational breakdown structure (OBS).

MR.Javier

Project Manager

MR.Ziani

Project accountant

Miss.Juan

Admin assistant

Mr.Jose

Project office manager

Mr.Nilo

Ship coordinator

Mr.Ismail

Operation manager

Directors

Functional

Departments

In a project team, the nature and volume of the project as well as the variety of projects to be handled will determine the lead position. Kerzner (2003, p. 162).

The project management and team leadership positions should be carefully defined and staffed at all projects levels. In a self-directed work environment, a Project Manager must display reliability, respect, trust as well as qualities that typically appears from the representation of an excellent decision maker with a superior track record in order to create and direct a project team (Cleland, 1999).

The Line Manager of the team members should not be associated with the duties of a Project Manager. The Project Manager is dedicated to manage the work of the project. The Project Manager must get the cooperation and support from the team without having direct authority over them. The ability to link the project to the strategy of the business is also an indicator of a successful Project Manager (Cleland, 1999).

Mr. Javier motivated the team to reach great goals, rather than merely bossing around with them (Rowe, 2007). Prior to the implementation of any leadership style, the leader should focus in plans to obtain employee satisfaction by applying components such as trust, confidence and effective communication. (Lamb and McKee, 2004).Managers with these attributes are effective in their leadership ability regardless of the style of leadership that they adapt (McShane and VonGlinow, 2004).

Mr. Javier’s approach as a people oriented leader enabled him to achieve employee satisfaction by utilizing his excellent competencies and skills.

7. Team development and conflict

New highway project was really important for our firm due to the huge opportunities hidden behind it. The head office wanted to allocate the best resources in our company to meet the project requirements.

Mr.Javier as the most experienced project manager in our company was allocated to be the project manager for this project. He had a meeting with the head office to select the members of the project team. The team was chosen within many criteria adequate with the project and to satisfy the key stakeholders’ expectations and needs (Source: PMI 2004)

The main criteria were identifying by Gray and Larson (2000) as:

Problem solving ability, were the team members had to work under pressure and ambiguities.

Availability, were the team was selected to work fulltime in this project, in a way to take decision on the spot and avoid all kind of problem during the project life cycle.

Technological expertise, the members of the team was chosen to be appropriate for the roles.

Credibility, by allocating people with a high credibility to improve the project and the project team reputation.

Political connections, one of the most important criteria because it will help to create a good relationship with the key stakeholders.

Ambition, initiative, and energy, project team with those criteria will have the abilities to compensate and cover the weaknesses in other fields.

“Conflicts are part of individual relationships and organizational development, and no relationship or organization can hope to mature to productivity and be successful without being able to resolve conflicts effectively” (Cottringer, 1997, p. 6).

During the project life cycle, we faced an interpersonal conflict between Mr.Ziani and Ms.Juan. This conflict was initiated before they joined the project team, but the tension between them raised during the implementation of this project as the interdependency between them was high. As a result, the cost of not resolving it was also high.

The entire team noticed the obvious heightened anger between Mr. Ziani and Ms. Juan. Consequently, both Mr. Ziani and Ms. Juan were distracted from their own work responsibility because both of them were occupied with blaming each other. A negative impact in their job performance was caused by the behaviors that both of them portrayed as they interact. For example, when Mr. Ziani needs a document or information from Ms. Juan he passed through another colleague to get it from her. Likewise from Ms. Juan’s side, when she received a communication or she need some work from Mr. Ziani, she asked other team members to talk on her behalf. It resulted in a stressful work environment.

Knowing that the duration of this project is short, the Project Manager dealt with this conflict by using an avoidance technique, physical separation and limited interaction (Pinto and Kharbanda, 1995). He tried to keep Mr. Ziani and Ms. Juan out of each other’s way as much as possible, and he played the role of referee between them till the end of the project. Simultaneously, in order to ensure that this conflict will not impact the job performance, he ordered the other members of the team to play the intermediary role between them and helped them to avoid the confrontation.

Conclusion:

In the first stage, Logilink identified the common interests between the stakeholders and analyze them by knowing their power, weaknesses, forces and threats (calvert 1995).

The organizational structure applied by the company for this project was a company used a project team organizational structure. This structure gave to the project team the power to work independently and to consecrate full time for the project

In the project team Mr Javier had the full authority over the project. Mr. Javier motivated the team to reach great goals, rather than merely bossing around with them (Rowe, 2007).

Mr. Javier’s approach as a people oriented leader enabled him to achieve employee satisfaction by utilizing his excellent competencies and skills.

The team was chosen within many criteria adequate with the project and to satisfy the key stakeholders’ expectations and needs (Source: PMI 2004), hence we saw an interpersonal conflict between two members of the project team. This conflict affected the team’s job performance.

In this conflict Mr.Javier used an avoidance technique, physical separation and limited interaction as for him it was the best way to deal with this conflict in that time due to the project circumstances.

In 2009, Logilink received a new project to handle the logistics arrangement of cement between Spain and Algeria. Our client, KDM Company was assigned by the government to supply the cement to build the new highway between Algiers and Constantine in Algeria. This project has a big impact in the economical and the political side, therefore the government of Algeria has assigned KDM to supply the cement in 6 months period of time. Logilink as a logistics firm had to ensure the proper transportation of cement from refinery at Spain to Algerian port. During the 6 months period, we have arranged with KDM to transport 48,000MT of cement per month to fulfill the total quantity required for this project.

4.STAKEHOLDERS

Logilink assigned our Project Manager Mr. Javier, to be in charge of this project. With the support of our CEO and shareholders, he selected the team to work with. The team comprised of five employees; Mr. Nilo the Ship Controller, Mr. Ziani the Finance Analyst, Miss Juan the Admin Assistant, Mr. Jose the Project Office Manager and me as the Operation Manager. To ensure smooth execution of this project, the functional teams within Logilink were instructed by the CEO to collaborate with Mr. Javier and provide him with all the resources required.

The groups, persons, organizations and institutions related to the building and running of the new highway or which is in its area of influence is registered or inventoried by means of brain storming. (Appendix1)

The team defined the stakeholders for this project by identifying organizations that had responsibilities or may affect the process and who had the influence over the new highway project.

List of stakeholders:

The evaluation of the project’s environmental impact corresponds to the

Association of Environment (APE)

The authorizing body for the project was the Ministry of Public Works

Logilink was responsible for shipping, maritime traffic and safety

The supplier of Cement was Repsol

The government sole distributor for cement in this project was KDM.

The construction was handled by private entrepreneurs

Bank (Societe General)

Media

Local transport companies.

Local supplies companies.

Stakeholders’ interests, project impact level and priority in relation to other stakeholders are identified in table1.

Table 1: Stakeholders interests and impacts table

Interests

Potential project impact

Relative priorities of interest

Secondary

Stakeholders

Ministry of public works

– Achievement of targets

– Control over funds

– Political image

+

2

Entrepreneurs

-Profits

– Achievement of targets

-reputation

+/-

+

+/-

1

Media

– Profits

– Supply information to the public.

+/-

3

Bank

Societe Generale

– Profits

+

3

Association Of Environment (APE)

– habitat destruction

-Environmental degradation

?

3

Local transport companies.

– Profits

– liabilities

+/-

+

2

Local supplies companies

– profits

– Liabilities

+/-

+

2

Primary

Stakeholders

KDM co.ltd

– Profits

– Achievement of targets

– Liability (avoid at all costs)

-Reputation

+/-

+

+/-

1

Project Manager

– Promotion

-Rewards

+

+

1

Repsol (Supplier)

-Profits

– Gain Algerian Market

+/-

+/-

1

Team members

– rewards and bonuses

– promotions

-expand skill level

+

?

+

2

During the process of strategic management, attention to stakeholders is important since the success and survival for public organizations relies on fulfilling key stakeholders according to their description of what is precious. (Bryson 1995: 27; Moore 1995).

As an alternative, many individual groups and organizations are occupied or have partial liability to act. Discovering what the predicament is and finding solutions are part of the problem while taking stakeholders into relation is an important criterion of problem solving. (Bryson and Crosby 1992; Bardach 1998)(pb-bryson)

To identify common interests between the stakeholders, the planning team had to find the relationship between the stakeholders to find the typical strategy where individual stakeholders will think that their own interests are advanced. (Andreasen 1995; Kotler, Roberto, and Lee 2002)

For example, KDM’s interest was to show efficiency and gain Algerian government’s trust. They will increase profit and obtain more contracts. KDM’s interest matched with our interest since we were a booming company searching for reputation rather than just making profit.

The government wanted to complete the project on time with high quality in order for them to be more credible in the eye of the public. From the side of Repsol, their interest is to gain maximum profit which matches the entrepreneur’s goals.

The stakeholder-issue interrelationship diagram explains how the planning team determined the relationship between the stakeholders through their common objectives.

Figure 1 Stakeholder-Issue Interrelationship Diagram (Bryant, 2003)

Political image and credibility

Supply information for the public

Habitat destruction and environmental degradation

Control over funds

Entrepreneurs

Ministry of public works

Association Of Environme

Media

Societe Generale

Achievement of targets

Profits

Reputation

Liabilities

Local supplies companies

Local transport companies

Repsol

Logilink co.ltd

KDM co.ltd

It was necessary for our project team to analyze the stakeholders. We investigated each stakeholder, by knowing their powers, weaknesses, forces and threats (calvert 1995).

Wideman (1998) suggests that the analysis should start by grouping stakeholders based on the influence.

The influence level differs between stakeholders; it depends on the hierarchical relationship to the project. The government had a high level of influence compared to other secondary stakeholders which influences were lower as the project was just an opportunity to achieve goals. (Source: Wideman 1998, p. 219)

KDM as the most important stakeholder had an influence on the project. If they weren’t satisfied they could stop the project. The Ministry of Public Works had a concern to the public sector so their influence was the highest.

The environmental association could also oppose the project. Nevertheless, they didn’t have a great degree of representation or the capacity for mobilizing people, so they had considerable degree of importance, but not influence.

Logilink didn’t have excessive importance due to low amount of competences that could affect the project. However, given their representation and capacity to mobilize, they were very influential. The same is true for entrepreneurs.

Local supply and transport companies had positive effect on the project execution which resulted in low importance and influence as they represented a small segment of the population.

Figure2. Classification of importance and influence of stakeholders affected by the New Highway project (Backoff and Nutt, 1992)

KDMImportance

Logilink

Entrepreneurs

LTC + LSC

Repsol

Ministry of public works

Media

Societe Generale

Association Of Environment

Influence

Mr. Javier designed a plan to increase support and minimize oppositions from the project stakeholders (Source: PMI 2004), after identifying stakeholders’ process and classifying the stakeholders by their geographic location and interest in the project. The strategy defined the level of participation desired by key stakeholders. The planning team interviewed key stakeholders individually, to ensure everyone’s genuine support to the project. If support is lacking, they discussed and resolved obstructing issues.

The treatment regarding communication and participation differed between stakeholders. The planning team arranged for each key stakeholder depending on interest level and the choice to be involved in all phases or in specific phases of the project.

KDM wanted to be involved in all phases of the project. Our project team arranged a weekly meeting with KDM and updated them by sending reports for each shipment. The Ministry of Public Works just wanted to be informed when the project was completed. The stakeholder management strategy used for the project was adequate to satisfy each key stakeholder and avoid any resistance to the project’s process.

5. Organisational structure

The organizational structure in our company defer from one project to another, in our new highway project the company used a project team organizational structure, due to its importance and complexity. This project required specialists to work on it full time as the due time of the project was too tight.

The company head office allocated Mr.Javier as project manager; the team of the project took a functional oriented structure form (Cleland 1999)

Figure3.Dedicated project team (Gray & Larson 2000)

Human Resources

Finance and administration

Ship Controller

Logilink co. ltd

Project Directors

Project Manager2

Project Manger 1

Team 1

Team 2

Sales and Marketing

 

Figure 3 shows the feature of our new project team. The team consists of the following; Mr. Nilo the Ship Controller, Mr. Ziani the Project Accountant, Miss Juan the Admin Assistant, MR.Jose the Project Office Manager and me as the Operation Manager. To execute this project efficiently, the functional teams within Logilink were instructed by the Head Office to join forces with Mr. Javier and provide him with all the resources required.

The importance of the project and its amplitude for success were the mean factors that determined the project team. All team members had a big experience in such project and knew how to deal with it in such short time.

The company applied this structure as project team structure allows the project team to work independently. The team consecrated full time for the project rather than being disrupted by other obligations or duties with their mean functional departments,

Although he had to report to senior executives in the parent organization, Mr Javier had the full authority over the project.

After utilizing this structure, we gained faster response time since most decisions were made within the team and were not differed up the hierarchy.

With proper direction, the project team worked together and was fully committed only on maximizing the project’s success while disregarding their area of expertise. Gray and Larson (2000),

Figure4. Projectized Organization (Source: PMI 2004)

In the project management consulting work, they identified a list of characteristics that many project managers have offered as successful characteristics in their core teams. For the most part, these characteristics are observed in individuals based on their experiences and the testimony of those who have worked with them. Typically these are not characteristics whereby the presence or absence in an individual is determined through interviews (Klassen and McLaughlin, 1993).

The roles and responsibilities of the project ream depend of the nature of the project itself and the level of power and capacities.

In the planning and resourcing process the project team was identified, so the team remained involved throughout the project and the resources from other groups were used when it was required.

6. Roles, responsibilities and relationships of project team members

After identifying the goals of the project and determining the resources needed, the head office discovered that they require a Project Manager with a lot of experience and knowledge for this particular project. Mr. Javier who is the existing Project Director in our firm was selected to be the Project Manager. His role was to ensure the implementation and success of the project as he had control over all project resources.

The roles and responsibilities of each team member were as follow:

– As the Project Office Manager, Mr. Jose’s responsibilities were to control and track the detailed plan, manage documentation and prepare various reports.

– As the Project Accountant, Mr. Ziani had to deal with procurement, sub-contractor expenditure, joint venture accounting, monitor progress tracking and handle financial reporting.

– As the Ship Coordinator, Mr. Nilo was responsible for the administrative aspects of the ship and served as the associate between our company and the client.

– As an Admin Assistant, Ms. Juan was a specialist in the creation of accurate usable documentation – both for the daily usage of the solution and as design documentation for future reference.

-As the Operation Manager, I handled the way the live technical solution should be operated. Operating procedures would include routine operations, controls, security, backup/recovery and disaster plans (Simon, 2004).

The organizational chart is an illustrative display of project reporting relationships (Kerzner, 2003). In our organization, the reporting relationships were informal due to the small size of the team. Our Project Manager was responsible for the creation of a WBS that mapped our assigned project to this organizational breakdown structure.

To present the reporting relationships within the project context, the company designed the organizational breakdown structure in a way to show who the project is functionally organized and to describe the hierarchy and organizations that supplied resources to arrange and to transmit the work identified in the work breakdown structure (WBS) (Kerzner, 2003).

Figure5.Illustrates our organizational breakdown structure (OBS).

MR.Javier

Project Manager

MR.Ziani

Project accountant

Miss.Juan

Admin assistant

Mr.Jose

Project office manager

Mr.Nilo

Ship coordinator

Mr.Ismail

Operation manager

Directors

Functional

Departments

In a project team, the nature and volume of the project as well as the variety of projects to be handled will determine the lead position. Kerzner (2003, p. 162).

The project management and team leadership positions should be carefully defined and staffed at all projects levels. In a self-directed work environment, a Project Manager must display reliability, respect, trust as well as qualities that typically appears from the representation of an excellent decision maker with a superior track record in order to create and direct a project team (Cleland, 1999).

The Line Manager of the team members should not be associated with the duties of a Project Manager. The Project Manager is dedicated to manage the work of the project. The Project Manager must get the cooperation and support from the team without having direct authority over them. The ability to link the project to the strategy of the business is also an indicator of a successful Project Manager (Cleland, 1999).

Mr. Javier motivated the team to reach great goals, rather than merely bossing around with them (Rowe, 2007). Prior to the implementation of any leadership style, the leader should focus in plans to obtain employee satisfaction by applying components such as trust, confidence and effective communication. (Lamb and McKee, 2004).Managers with these attributes are effective in their leadership ability regardless of the style of leadership that they adapt (McShane and VonGlinow, 2004).

Mr. Javier’s approach as a people oriented leader enabled him to achieve employee satisfaction by utilizing his excellent competencies and skills.

7. Team development and conflict

New highway project was really important for our firm due to the huge opportunities hidden behind it. The head office wanted to allocate the best resources in our company to meet the project requirements.

Mr.Javier as the most experienced project manager in our company was allocated to be the project manager for this project. He had a meeting with the head office to select the members of the project team. The team was chosen within many criteria adequate with the project and to satisfy the key stakeholders’ expectations and needs (Source: PMI 2004)

The main criteria were identifying by Gray and Larson (2000) as:

Problem solving ability, were the team members had to work under pressure and ambiguities.

Availability, were the team was selected to work fulltime in this project, in a way to take decision on the spot and avoid all kind of problem during the project life cycle.

Technological expertise, the members of the team was chosen to be appropriate for the roles.

Credibility, by allocating people with a high credibility to improve the project and the project team reputation.

Political connections, one of the most important criteria because it will help to create a good relationship with the key stakeholders.

Ambition, initiative, and energy, project team with those criteria will have the abilities to compensate and cover the weaknesses in other fields.

“Conflicts are part of individual relationships and organizational development, and no relationship or organization can hope to mature to productivity and be successful without being able to resolve conflicts effectively” (Cottringer, 1997, p. 6).

During the project life cycle, we faced an interpersonal conflict between Mr.Ziani and Ms.Juan. This conflict was initiated before they joined the project team, but the tension between them raised during the implementation of this project as the interdependency between them was high. As a result, the cost of not resolving it was also high.

The entire team noticed the obvious heightened anger between Mr. Ziani and Ms. Juan. Consequently, both Mr. Ziani and Ms. Juan were distracted from their own work responsibility because both of them were occupied with blaming each other. A negative impact in their job performance was caused by the behaviors that both of them portrayed as they interact. For example, when Mr. Ziani needs a document or information from Ms. Juan he passed through another colleague to get it from her. Likewise from Ms. Juan’s side, when she received a communication or she need some work from Mr. Ziani, she asked other team members to talk on her behalf. It resulted in a stressful work environment.

Knowing that the duration of this project is short, the Project Manager dealt with this conflict by using an avoidance technique, physical separation and limited interaction (Pinto and Kharbanda, 1995). He tried to keep Mr. Ziani and Ms. Juan out of each other’s way as much as possible, and he played the role of referee between them till the end of the project. Simultaneously, in order to ensure that this conflict will not impact the job performance, he ordered the other members of the team to play the intermediary role between them and helped them to avoid the confrontation.

Conclusion:

In the first stage, Logilink identified the common interests between the stakeholders and analyze them by knowing their power, weaknesses, forces and threats (calvert 1995).

The organizational structure applied by the company for this project was a company used a project team organizational structure. This structure gave to the project team the power to work independently and to consecrate full time for the project

In the project team Mr Javier had the full authority over the project. Mr. Javier motivated the team to reach great goals, rather than merely bossing around with them (Rowe, 2007).

Mr. Javier’s approach as a people oriented leader enabled him to achieve employee satisfaction by utilizing his excellent competencies and skills.

The team was chosen within many criteria adequate with the project and to satisfy the key stakeholders’ expectations and needs (Source: PMI 2004), hence we saw an interpersonal conflict between two members of the project team. This conflict affected the team’s job performance.

In this conflict Mr.Javier used an avoidance technique, physical separation and limited interaction as for him it was the best way to deal with this conflict in that time due to the project circumstances.

Cite This Work

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing stye below:

Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.
Reference Copied to Clipboard.

Related Services

View all

DMCA / Removal Request

If you are the original writer of this essay and no longer wish to have your work published on the UKDiss.com website then please: