Case Study Gen
Her vision is to use existing technology In retail to develop a new product and create the demand from a new market. Her goal Is to get the development team on her side to work within her timeline and plan. 3. Kelly Thomas Kelly needs to assure quality control with both new and existing products. He understands that new products can’t just have money thrown at it rather it takes time to go through the planning, developing, and testing phases.
He believes his team Is maxed out with projects and Is not able to meet the demanding timeline from Pat. His objective is to use his resources wisely to meet the current customers’ demands.
OFF snarls Martens Chris must balance profitability and the current work environment. He needs to find ways to generate a profit. He is expecting each department manager to find ways to cut cost in each of their departments by 15%.
He is letting both Pat and Kelly work out their differences. Evaluating Argument: 1. Cliff O’Connor Cliffs argument is valid because he is trying to maintain the company’s profitability. He is looking at the longevity of the company by looking towards new products. His argument is logical. 2.
Pat Lambert Pat was hired to view the company through a new lens.
New and fresh ideas are added to breathe life back into the company. She wants to create a new product to target a new audience. Her argument is not logical but emotional. She’s trying to prove herself and wants to meet goals.
She is not as willing to understand the process behind it that will allow it to be successful. 3. Kelly Thomas Kelly understands the logistics of product development and is not in-line with the unrealistic production timeline. Kelly is the original developer on this product and may have emotional ties to it. However, having been on the original project, Kelly also knows all that is takes to complete the Job.
Kelly is both logical and emotional.
4. Chris Martinis Chris knows he needs to cut costs. He’s trying to complete this task without a reduction in labor. He knows a cut would be difficult and lower moral. His actions are based on emotional outlook. Fallacious Arguments 1.
Pat has under-minded my authority by talking directly to Kelly’s staff. (Kelly) 2. Developing a small prototype by August should be doable with minimal effort with the staff. (Pat) 3. A delay is development can cost the company greatly and allow the competitors to have an advantage.
(Pat) 4. Staff is not able to meet unrealistic deadlines. Kelly) Conclusion Problems and Situations 1. Cliff O’Connor – CEO wants to develop an Operation Optimize with two thirds of the intended budget. 2. The new marketing director and developer are not working together on a common goal.
3. The company is losing money. Data and Facts Contributing to Situation 1. Cliff wants to develop the Operation Optimize with less of the budget because the company does not have the money to fully implement the project at the cost outlined by Pat. 2.
Through several email correspondences both Pat and Kelly show that they do not see eye to eye. 3.
The Progress Report along with other documents shows he company is barely sustaining 40% of the market. Underlying Problem & Cause of Conflict with Cancan Pat is uncompromising and is not willing to listen to what has worked in the past at Cancan. He feels a new product launch is the key to the success of the company. Kelly’s emotional ties leads to a defense response to Pat’s request and an unwillingness to find a mutual understanding in order to meet the company’s goal and for the betterment of all.
Alternative solutions 1. Produce the product in stages. Plan and set several timeliness throughout the reduction.
Utilize standard methods for development and testing. 2. Discuss current workload of staff and determine if any other projects can be put secondary to this new project.
3. Create a “star team” of developers to work on an extra project and discuss alternative ways of compensation – I. E. Extra days off. Strength and Weakness of Each Solution 1.
Strength – Rolling the project in phases would give each stage a tine to pinpoint any glitches. The slower implementation would still allow employees to work on other projects. Weakness – The product would not be out by August and the competition would have mom advantage. . Strength – No extra use of labor would occur and the timeline would be met.
Weakness – Some existing customers may not receive their projects on time. 3. Strength – Star teams can develop future leaders. Current leadership can identify “go getters”. It is a morale booster. Employee can gain some extra days off.
Weakness – Company will lose production time when employees take extra days off. Recommendation to CEO I would recommend rolling out the project in stages. According to the data, the company does not have the funds to hire extra staff.
Based on Kelly’s experience, at this point, the project cannot be developed at is highest standards. By rolling it out in stages, more quality control can occur and more features can be added for the consumer. A better quality product will be produced without fewer defects.
References Critical Thinking GENDER: Assessment Case Study. University of Phoenix Courseware. Retrieved from the World Wide Web June 20, 2006. HTTPS://campus. Phoenix.
Due/ secure/ resource/Resourceful. Asp? Star=/secure/resource/vendors/data/GENDER/ index. &or=31 &opt=Resource- PM&del=False&id=8143