Project Management Plan – Preston City Retail Outlet Construction

Disclaimer: This is not a sample of our professional work. The paper has been produced by a student. You can view samples of our work here. Opinions, suggestions, recommendations and results in this piece are those of the author and should not be taken as our company views.

Executive Summary

The current report is developed to include the entire project plan for constructing a Retail Outlet in the Preston City Council area. The project includes constructing a retail space that ensures 80 per cent of the use of the site allotted. The project plan includes cost estimations for construction on a 5,000m² space that totals £700,000.

After completion of project estimates, tasks, materials, plants, and labour, the project’s total cost totals £690,651.24. The project’s material consists mostly of a steel-framed structure with masonry, steel insulated panels, and thick ground floor slabs.

The project report includes the estimated scheduling of the project, which takes place from 11^th October 2019 to 27^th March 2020. The current report also includes a work breakdown structure that is the basis of the project.

It includes all the necessary tasks required for completing the construction of the retail building. Based on this work breakdown structure, the project tasks are scheduled. The current report also suggests methods for minimising scope creep and mitigating risks throughout the project.

Introduction

The Preston City Retail Outlet project management plan provides the present project with a dependable set of methods to manage the entire project cycle. The present project plan provides insight into the scope, budget, business performance, management objectives and schedule for constructing the retail outlet according to the objectives and ideals of the stakeholders involved. The goal of the project is to construct a retail outlet for the client within the scheduled time and cost.

Project Attributes

Construction projects differ greatly from other types of ventures that may use project management as they are extremely diverse in tasks and incorporate various attributes. Construction projects include key factors like quality, cost, scheduling, and review of major characteristics.

Finances of construction projects are extremely complex, making it difficult for construction organisations to easily predict fluctuating costs of the entire project. The aspect of fluctuating budget and regulatory conditions plays a great role in producing project uncertainty compared to other construction activities. In addition, the deliverables and metrics of construction projects are different from typical project activities. The current project includes the following attributes.

1. Project needs to have a start and finish point – The current project; Preston Community Area’s Retail Outlet, includes the following project timeline;
   1. Start – 11^th October 2019
   2. Proposed Finish –30^th March 2020
2. Designated budget – Projects have a capital budget than businesses with a revenue budget. The capital budget for the proposed project is;
   1. Base Cost from cost per m² = 5000m² x £1,650 = £16,500
3. Projects are unique – The current project will include the following client conditions:
   1. Steel frame structure with masonry at the height of 2.4m, with steel insulated panels
   2. Height of building at 10 meters.
   3. 50% of the ground floor has a mezzanine floor above.
   4. Total floor area 5,000m²
   5. The building occupies 80% of the area of the site.
4. Temporary teams – projects include the use of temporary teams, where business usually involves long-standing teams. The current project consists of the following teams;
   1. Leadership Team
   2. Design Team
   3. Engineering Team

The proposed project includes these attributes because of the nature of the project. This is what separates it from business as usual activities. These project attributes will play a key role in developing the project management strategy.

Project Constraints

Every project comes with different constraints that may hinder the project through obstacles to overcome. Most project managers focus on minimising triple constraints, including scope, time, and cost goals. However, the current project is quite complex and considers various aspects of construction management. Therefore, it is imperative to produce the current project by assessing the quadruple constraint. These include the following;

• Scope: The project is to construct a retail store outlet in the Preston City Council area. This includes ensuring that the building occupies 80% of the area of the site. At the same time, the remaining 20% of the area is the car park. The scope of the project is to remain within its contract work for the construction of the building while also ensuring that the client receives an installation of structural steel for the framework and the casting of a 200mm thick ground floor slab.
• Schedule/Time: This constraint deals with building processes and outputs that go into the project and help the team and management complete the project within the designated time. The proposed schedule begins on 11^th October 2019 and ends on 30^th March 2020.
• Cost: The constraint ensures that the purpose of the project is maintained, which is to maximise profit. This means ensuring that the project remains within the proposed budget of £700,000 and does not increase due to changes in time and cost of the material.
• Quality: This is the fourth constraint added in the Quadruple Constraint theory. Quality includes scope, time and cost. Any of the changes made to them will influence the quality of the project or product being developed.

Manowong and Ogunlana (2008) note that each of these constraints is measurable, and a change in that one of them can automatically impact the other constraints.

Project Management Methodology

Academics like Gist and Langley (2007), Johnston and Wierschem (2005), and Chine and Spowage (2012) have asserted that project management methodologies have only recently become popular and implemented in various sectors and industries in the last three decades.

Many professionals and organisations have created different methods and techniques to help project managers to manage complex projects. Since their inceptions, project management methods have evolved greatly to incorporate tighter controls, better approaches, and influence many experiences.

However, Delisle and Olson (2004) disagree with the premise and counter that even though project management methods have undergone a great deal of advancement, plenty of projects still use these methods but still end up failing or ending up in conflict.

There are name ways available for project managers to manage activities, with each differentiating on different levels and producing different conclusions. Nonetheless, regardless of the methods that a project manager chooses or stakeholders choose to use, it is important that project managers carefully consider the overall project objectives, its budget, its time frame, and the many roles given to stakeholders in the project to avoid conflict (Themistocleous and Wearne, 2000).

Academics like Rolstadas et al. (2014) and Howard (2010) argue that the best method for the construction industry to use is the waterfall method of project management, in addition to Prince2, which is often used as a structured method for project management.

Eskerod (2009) has found in their research that Prince2 is a very popular method used in project management, especially in the private sector and the government of the UK. The reason for this may be that the Prince3 method is process-driven as it places greater focus on high-level activities, specific organisation, control, and management.

However, Hass (2007) asserts that even though the focus is on high-level activities, low-level activities are imperative to project management. Project managers often neglect them, specifically work activities and schedules. Hass (2007) has also found that negligence of these low-level activities leads to the most conflict between stakeholders in complex projects.

The literature review found that Albrecht and Spang (2014) and Cavaleri et al. (2012) found advantages in the waterfall method. It can allow the project to move forward to other phases after the previous phases have been completed.

This is a method that focuses on sequential order and verifies each order. On the other hand, Cervone (2011) does not agree with the arguments that have thus far been presented and argue that the waterfall method has many disadvantages.

Cervone (2011) states that the strongest disadvantage is the amount of work and time that goes into the planning and sequencing of events and tasks needed in the waterfall and Prince2 methods.

Studies conducted by Gist and Langley (2007) also agree with Cervone’s (2011) statement and say that about 20% to 40% of the time used in a project under the waterfall method is used to draw up plans for making specific plans criteria and design.

Preventing Scope Creep

Occurring from one point to another in the project life cycle, scope creep becomes an aspect. The fact is that business requirements become different based on projects of certain types, and the resulting scope of work changes as its response.

While the impact of changes is asses, the traditional methods become very slow and might even stop. The agile method takes care of traditional counterparts differently from scope creep. At the start of each short cycle of plan or iteration, changes from the scope and the project are re-planned (Albrecht and Spang 2014).

Cervone (2011) suggests that the evaluation and prioritisation of scope need to occur to prevent scope creep through the agile process. That will include the risks needed to be made with the stakeholders and client involvement, also can include to changes risks changes & time.

Pre-Initiating Meeting

1. Initiation
   1. Risk Management Plan issued at the start of the project and reviewed at 2 weeks’ project intervals.
2. Identification
   1. Threats & Opportunities recognition using:
      1. Brainstorming with team members
      2. Review of standard checklist
      3. Use of Initial Risk Register
3. Assessment
   1. Use of Probability and Impact Assessment for identified Risk
   2. Risk categorisation using RBS.
4. Response Planning
   1. Identification of Actions and Action owners
   2. Risk Register Update
5. Reporting
   1. Risk Report to Project Sponsor
6. Implementation
   1. Monitoring of the effectiveness of actions and updating project plans
7. Review
   1. Risk Workshop
8. Post-Project Review

We are meeting to capture all lessons learned regarding project risk and overall management.

Work Breakdown Structure

Cost Estimating Techniques and Baseline

Calculating project size using techniques established by Hillson and Simon (2007). The following table provides a calculation method that estimates the size of the project to establish cost estimating techniques.

Table 1- Project Size and Cost Analysis

Strategic Importance- Preston City Retail Outlet project is imperative for business success in the Preston City Council area, allowing the population and neighbouring populations to have a retail outlet for shopping needs. Also, the Retail Outlet will provide Preston City Council with much-needed revenue for the city in terms of tax collection once the outlet begins running.

Commercial Complexity- There are several commercial complexities in the project, primarily contractual disputes between contractor and retailer. There is also a possibility of issues arising with steel’s material cost, which may fluctuate as construction is being conducted.

Essential Constraints and Dependencies- External factors such as exchange rates, political regulation, and pressure from various advocacy groups are driving the scheduling. The project will be on hold until these factors become constant.

Technical Complexity- No new technologies are being implemented to the completion of this project. It is more of a form of repeating business as the equipment is already established with the contractor, and no new technologies are being used.

Project Duration- The project is slated to be completed within 3 months.

Project Value- The contracted amount for completing this project is estimated at £30,000.

Project Resources- The project uses construction contractors, design consultants, and engineering consultants.

Risk and Risk Management

Risk Probability- Impact Matrix

Table 2- Risk and Actions Charts for Risk Mitigation

Table 3- Risk Breakdown Structure

Integration Management in Execution

Project integration management includes several processes used to ensure that many elements of the projects are appropriately coordinated. This involves having to make trade-offs with competing objectives and alternatives to meet or exceed the needs and expectations of all stakeholders.

All aspects discussed so far in the current project report are processes in integrating the projects. This specific section focuses on ‘project plan execution’, which is carrying out the project plan by performing the activities included in it.

Project plan execution is the primary process for carrying out the project plan; this includes the vast majority of the project’s budget is expended in performing the processes. For this particular stage in the project, the project manager and the project team will coordinate and direct many of the technical and organisational interfaces in the project—the most impacted project processes directly affected by the project application area where the project is created. The project plan execution portion of integration management includes inputs, tools &techniques, and outputs, as Figure 6 below.

Appendix I- Gantt Chart for Project Schedule

Appendix II-  Table of Activity and Costs

References

Albrecht, J. C., and Spang, K. (2014) Linking the benefits of project management maturity to project complexity: Insights from multiple case study. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 7(2), p. 285-301.

Baloi, P., and Price, A. (2003) Modelling global risk factors affecting construction cost performance. International Journal of Project Management, 21(4), 261-269.

Baumeister, R.F., Leary, M.R., 1997. Writing narrative literature reviews. Review of General Psychology 1, 311–320. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.1.3.311

Bem, D., 1995. Writing a Review Article. Psychological Bulletin 118, 172–177.

Carroll, A., and Bucholtz, A. (2012). Business & Society: Ethics, Sustainability, and Stakeholder Management (8^th ed.). Mason, OH: South-Western Cengage Learning.

Colle, S. D. (2005). A stakeholder management model for ethical decision making. International Management and Decision Making, 6(3), pp. 299-314.

Cavaleri, S., Firestone, J., and Reed, F. (2012) Managing project problem-solving patterns. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 5(1), p. 125-145.

Cervone, H. F. (2011) Understanding agile project management methods using Scrum. OCLC Systems and Services: International Digital Library Perspectives, 27(1), p. 18-22.

Chin, C. M. M., and Spoqage, A. C. (2012) Project management methodologies: A comparative analysis. Journal for the Advancement of Performance Information and Value, 4 (1), p. 106-118.

Cooper, D., Grey, S., Raymond, G., and Walker, P. (2005) Project Risk Management Guidelines: Managing Risk in Large Project and Complex Procurements. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Delisle, C. L., and Olson, D. (2004) Would the real project management language please stand up? International Journal of Project Management, 22, p. 327-337.

Eskerod, P., Riis, E. (2009) Project management models as value creators. Project Management Journal, 40(1), p. 4-18.

Fewings, P. (2005). Construction project management: An Integrated Approach., Abingdon: Taylor Francis.

Fisher, R., and Ury, W. (1991). Getting To ‘Yes’: Negotiating An Agreement Without Giving In (2^nd edition). London: Century Business.

Gray, C. F. & Larson, E. W. (2008). Project Management: The Managerial Process. Boston,        MA: McGraw-Hills Companies, Inc.

Heldman, K. (2005). Project Manager’s Spotlight on Risk Management. San Francisco, CA:          Jossey-Bass.

Hillson, D & Simon, P. (2007). Practical Project Risk Management: The ATOM Methodology,      Vienna, VA: Management Concepts, Inc

Hilson, D. & Simon, P. (2012). Practical Project Risk Management: The ATOM Methodology       (2^nd ed.). Vienna, VA: Management Concepts.

Jepsen, A. L. and Eskerod, P., 2009. Stakeholder analysis in projects: Challenges in using current guidelines in the real world. International Journal of Project Management, 27, pp. 335-345.

Kadushin, C., 2011. Understanding Social Networks: Theories, Concepts, and Findings. New York: Oxford University Press.

Karlsen, J. T. (2002). Project Stakeholder Management. Engineering Management Journal, 14(4), 19–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/10429247.2002.11415180

Manowong, E., & Ogunlana, S. O. (2008). Critical Factors for Successful Public Hearing in Infrastructure Development Projects: A Case Study of the Nuch Waste Disposal Plant Project. International Journal of Construction Management, 8(1), 37–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2008.10773107

Walker, D. H. T. (2012) Making sense of agile project management balancing control and agility. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 5(1), p. 158-161.

Wilkinson, S. (2001) An analysis of the problems faced by project management companies managing construction projects. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 8(3), p. 160-170.

Winch, G. M. (2010) Managing Construction Projects (2^nd edition). West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.

Wit, A. D. (1988). Measurement of project success. International Journal of Project Management, 6(3), pp. 164-170.

Eskerod, P., Riis, E. (2009) Project management models as value creators. Project Management Journal, 40(1), p. 4-18.

Fewings, P. (2005). Construction project management: An Integrated Approach., Abingdon: Taylor Francis.

Fisher, R., and Ury, W. (1991). Getting To ‘Yes’: Negotiating An Agreement Without Giving In (2nd edition). London: Century Business.

Gray, C. F. & Larson, E. W. (2008). Project Management: The Managerial Process. Boston,            MA: McGraw-Hills Companies, Inc.

Heldman, K. (2005). Project Manager’s Spotlight on Risk Management. San Francisco, CA:            Jossey-Bass.

Hillson, D & Simon, P. (2007). Practical Project Risk Management: The ATOM Methodology,         Vienna, VA: Management Concepts, Inc

Hilson, D. & Simon, P. (2012). Practical Project Risk Management: The ATOM Methodology          (2nd ed.). Vienna, VA: Management Concepts.

Jepsen, A. L. and Eskerod, P., 2009. Stakeholder analysis in projects: Challenges in using current guidelines in the real world. International Journal of Project Management, 27, pp. 335-345.

Kadushin, C., 2011. Understanding Social Networks: Theories, Concepts, and Findings. New York: Oxford University Press.

Karlsen, J. T. (2002). Project Stakeholder Management. Engineering Management Journal, 14(4), 19–24. https://doi.org/10.1080/10429247.2002.11415180

Manowong, E., & Ogunlana, S. O. (2008). Critical Factors for Successful Public Hearing in Infrastructure Development Projects: A Case Study of the Nuch Waste Disposal Plant Project. International Journal of Construction Management, 8(1), 37–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2008.10773107

Walker, D. H. T. (2012) Making sense of agile project management balancing control and agility. International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 5(1), p. 158-161.

Wilkinson, S. (2001) An analysis of the problems faced by project management companies managing construction projects. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 8(3), p. 160-170.

Winch, G. M. (2010) Managing Construction Projects (2nd edition). West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.

Wit, A. D. (1988). Measurement of project success. International Journal of Project Management, 6(3), pp. 164-170.