Sample Scenario 1 Multi Questions version 3.0 (Nov 05 Manual) Document Control Information

Transcription

1 Sample Scenario 1 Multi Questions version 3.0 (Nov 05 Manual) Document Details Document Control Information Document Name: Sample Scenario 1 Multi Questions version 3.0 (Nov 05 Manual) Purpose of Document: Provided to help candidates understand the format and type of questions for the practitioner examination Document Version Number: 3.0 Document Status: Document Owner: Prepared by: Live Nicola Kelly Colin Bentley Date of first draft: Jan 2006 Date Approved: Jan 2006 Approved by: Colin Bentley Next Scheduled review date: Version History Version Number: Date Approved: Change / Reons for change / Comments: /01/06 Document brought in line with APMG document management system and reviewed for changes against the November edition of the PRINCE2 Manual. Distribution List Version Name Title / Company All All Public document Version 3.0 (Status Live) Page 1 Document Owner Nicola Kelly The APM Group This document is not to be re-produced or re-sold without express permission from The APM Group

2 SAMPLE SCENARIO 1 You work for a large company that h a history of delivering poor quality products. In particular the company seems to get a lot of poor quality work from its sub-contractors, but things are so muddled that it is difficult to pin down who did the work. On return from a PRINCE2 course you are given an existing project to manage where a major slippage h been announced, but too late for senior management to do much about it. The previous project manager h been moved to other work, but is available for information about the project. The project h not been run under PRINCE2. The senior management in charge blame the previous project manager, but the chairman tells you in confidence that she believes there is a lack of senior management control. At the first chat with the previous project manager he says, It s such a huge, complex plan for a 12-month project. It s impossible with such a timescale to spot small slippages until the accumulative effect ruins the schedule. As it is I am spending nearly all of my time trying to keep this monster plan up-to-date. The problem is made worse because the project in question is working to a very tight deadline. Management are worried that a competitor might beat them to the market with a similar product. Version 3.0 (Status Live) Page 2 Document Owner Nicola Kelly The APM Group This document is not to be re-produced or re-sold without express permission from The APM Group

3 Scenario Questions 1. How would PRINCE2 address the problem of delivering poor quality products? Be specific in terms of the components, processes and techniques that would contribute. 2. What pects of PRINCE2 would address the problem of slippages being announced too late for remedial action to be taken? 3. In PRINCE2 how and when could senior management be effectively involved in a project to ensure that they have control without committing themselves full-time to the project? 4. Taking the previous project manager s comments about the huge, complex plan, does PRINCE2 offer a better way of doing things which would attack this problem? 5. How would PRINCE2 tackle the problem of sub-contractors delivering poor quality goods? 6. The project which h slipped is supposed to be working to a tight deadline. What can you propose to remedy the situation, and what pects of PRINCE2 would come into play? 7. The company chairman h raised the question of how use of PRINCE2 would go some way to solving their current quality problem. Identify the are where the introduction of PRINCE2 would contribute to improving quality in a project. 8. Describe how the PRINCE2 organisation structure could be used in the 12-month project in question to ee the burden on senior management and the project manager. 9. How would a configuration management method sist in tracking down bad work by a sub-contractor? What links would it have with other PRINCE2 elements that would contribute to better quality? 10. If the project manager w responsible for the late reporting of slippage, what PRINCE2 controls and sub-processes would have sisted in avoiding this? 11. Identify and describe the element within PRINCE2 that would address the problem posed by the competitor s product. How might that affect this situation? Version 3.0 (Status Live) Page 3 Document Owner Nicola Kelly The APM Group This document is not to be re-produced or re-sold without express permission from The APM Group

4 Marking Schem Question 1 How would PRINCE2 address the problem of delivering poor quality products? Be specific in terms of the components, processes, techniques etc. that would contribute. Q1 1. Identifying customer s quality expectations (2) in SU (1) 3 2. Senior Supplier (responsible) (1) & Senior User (ensuring 2 quality) (1) roles 3. Use of the project surance roles (2) in checking quality (1) 3 4. Project Board check on quality at each ESA 2 5. Is there a customer (or supplier) QMS? 1 6. Chosen Project Approach affects quality plans 1 7. Planning quality in IP1 (1), the Project Quality Plan (2) and 5 Stage Quality Plan (2) 8. The use of Product Descriptions (2) Quality Criteria (2) Quality 8 Method (2) user involved (2) 9. Product-bed planning (1) helps identify quality products and 2 their timing (1) 10. Work Packages (2) CS1 (1) & MP1 (1) agree quality 4 requirements 11. Quality Reviews (2) and their description (2) Choice of QR reviewers (1) in Stage Quality Plans (1) CS2 checks on progress including quality, Quality checks done in MP2 (1) updates Quality Log (2) CS9 (1) checks that product quality h been approved (1) Configuration management use by supplier Change Control (2). Project Issues (1) can record any quality 4 problems (1) Total 50 Version 3.0 (Status Live) Page 4 Document Owner Nicola Kelly The APM Group This document is not to be re-produced or re-sold without express permission from The APM Group

5 Question 2 What pects of PRINCE2 would address the problem of slippages being announced too late for remedial action to be taken? Q2 Marks Score 1. Tolerance (2) set in terms of time (2), emphis on forecting 6 (2) 2. Project Issue (2) CS8 (1) Exception Report (1 for name, 2 for 8 content) + Exception Plans (2) 3. Assurance roles keeping an eye on plan progress (2) & amount 3 of quality rework (1) 4. Division of project into stages (2) & checking progress at ESA 5 (3) 5. Stage (2)/Team (2) Plans down to a level of detail where 6 slippages can be seen early (2) 6. Regular stage/team plan updates (2) part of MP2 (2) CS2 (2) 8 reviewed in CS5 (2) 7. Work Packages (2) stipulating reporting requirements (1) & 4 frequency (1) 8. Checkpoint Meeting/Report (2) reporting slippage an early 3 problem (1) 9. CS6 (1) Highlight Reports (2) reporting slippage an early 4 problem (1) 10. Risk management (2) identifying slippage a risk & monitoring 3 it (1) Total 50 Version 3.0 (Status Live) Page 5 Document Owner Nicola Kelly The APM Group This document is not to be re-produced or re-sold without express permission from The APM Group

6 Question 3 In PRINCE2 how and when could senior management be effectively involved in a project to ensure that they have control without committing themselves full-time to the project? Q3 Possib le 1. Project Board roles (1 x 3 for each mentioned, 1 x 3 each for 6 explanation) 2. Senior management can appoint Executive (2) from themselves 5 (2) Project Manager (1) 3. Clear Project Mandate (2) DP1 (2) approve Project Brief (2) 6 4. Setting correct direction at Initiation (1) approve Project 3 Initiation Document (2) 5. Use of ESAs (2) and Stages (2) management by exception (2) 6 6. Delegation of stage to project manager 2 7. Project Assurance (1 for mention, 3 for explanation) delegated 6 (2) 8. Use of Ad Hoc Direction to provide input & when required 2 9. Use of Tolerances (1 for mention, 2 for explanation) Exception 7 Reports (2) DP4 (1) DP3 (1) 10. Highlight Reports (1 for mention, 2 for explanation) 3 9 Communication Plan (2) when (1) & what (1) information to be 4 given Total 50 Score Version 3.0 (Status Live) Page 6 Document Owner Nicola Kelly The APM Group This document is not to be re-produced or re-sold without express permission from The APM Group

7 Question 4 Taking the project manager s comments about the huge, complex plan, does PRINCE2 offer a better way of doing things that would attack this problem? Q4 1 Breaking the Project Plan down into Stages (2) at initiation time 3 (1) 2 The use of Team Plans (2) and Team Managers (1) 3 3 How far ahead is it sensible to plan (2) & the SB process (2) 9 Stage Plan only created towards end of previous stage (2) reons why this helps (up to 3) 4 Project Plan = summary 2 5 Use of project support to help with plan preparation (2) & 3 updates (1) 6 Update Project Plan at ESAs 2 7 Stage Tolerances 2 8 Exception Plans 1 9 Use of CS2 (2) and CS5 (2) to monitor team (1) & stage (1) 6 a s plans Total 31 Version 3.0 (Status Live) Page 7 Document Owner Nicola Kelly The APM Group This document is not to be re-produced or re-sold without express permission from The APM Group

8 Question 5 How would PRINCE2 tackle the problem of sub-contractors delivering poor quality goods? Q5 1 The establishment of Product Descriptions (2) with good quality 6 criteria (2) and defined quality checking methods (2) 2 The use of Work Packages (2) to ensure that quality 4 requirements (1) and reporting (1) were clearly identified. 3 The use of a Quality Log that the sub-contractor had to 2 complete for all products. 4 Project Assurance (2) planning the involvement of the correct 4 reviewers (2) to check the quality of the sub-contractor s deliverables. 5 Ensuring the correct use of the Project Issues procedure by the 2 sub-contractor. 6 The insistence on the use of team plans and the need to inspect 2 these at draft time in order to check the suitability and adequacy of quality checking procedures. Total 20 Version 3.0 (Status Live) Page 8 Document Owner Nicola Kelly The APM Group This document is not to be re-produced or re-sold without express permission from The APM Group

9 Question 6 The project that h slipped is supposed to be working to a tight deadline. What can you propose to remedy the situation, and what pects of PRINCE2 would come into play? Q6 1. Raise Project Issue (2) CS3 (1) CS4 (1) impact analysis (2) 14 Business Ce (2) risks (2) tolerances (2) Stage (1) & Project Plan (1) 2. CS8 Escalating Project Issues 1 3. Exception Report (1 for mention, 2 for content) 3 4. Reduce scope (2) quality (2) 4 5. Incree resources (2) incree time tolerance (2) 4 6. DP4 Giving Ad Hoc Direction 1 7. Exception Plan (2) DP3 (1) other Project Board options (2) 5 Total 32 Version 3.0 (Status Live) Page 9 Document Owner Nicola Kelly The APM Group This document is not to be re-produced or re-sold without express permission from The APM Group

10 Question 7 The company chairman h raised the question of whether an attempt to achieve ISO 9000 certification would go some way to solving the quality problem, but h no idea of how to go about it. Put forward a ce where the introduction of PRINCE2 would contribute to obtaining ISO 9000 certification. Q7 1 Quality policy - include use of P2 in corporate quality 1 policy/qms 2 Organisation - quality responsibilities in Job descriptions 2 3 Use of Project Assurance roles 2 4 Quality Review procedure 2 5 QR roles 1 6 Quality expectations in Project Mandate 1 7 Project Quality Plan 2 8 Stage Quality Plan - identify quality checkers 2 9 Contract review - Project Initiation Document 1 10 Plan updates in CS 2 11 ESAs 2 12 PDs 2 13 Product-bed planning 1 14 Lessons Learned Report 2 15 Quality Log 1 16 Quality file 1 17 Work Packages 1 18 Processes 2 19 Project Issue procedure 2 20 CM 2 Total 32 Version 3.0 (Status Live) Page 10 Document Owner Nicola Kelly The APM Group This document is not to be re-produced or re-sold without express permission from The APM Group

11 Question 8 Describe how the PRINCE2 organisation structure could be used in the 12-month project in question to ee the burden on senior management and the project manager. Q8 1 Appointment of Executive to represent them (2) SU1 (1) 3 3 Appointment of lower-level managers to the project board 4 (including the necessary authority). SU2 (1) SU3 (1) 2 Delegation of day-to-day running from Project Board to Project 2 Manager 4 The use of a Change Control Board (2) with authority and 3 budget (1) to make decisions on changes.. 5 The delegation of surance responsibilities to suitable staff to 2 monitor and sure the project on their behalf. 6 The use of project support staff or a Project Support Office to 2 take some of the administrative burden from the project manager.. 7 The use of team managers to take some of the planning and 2 control burden from the project manager. 8 Management by exception 2 Total 20 Version 3.0 (Status Live) Page 11 Document Owner Nicola Kelly The APM Group This document is not to be re-produced or re-sold without express permission from The APM Group

12 Question 9 How would a configuration management method sist in tracking down bad work by a sub-contractor? What links would it have with other PRINCE2 elements that would contribute to better quality? Q9 1 CM identifies, tracks, protects and reports (1 each) on product 7 versions (2) and status (1) 2 CM freezes a product version only after it h been approved 2 3 CM records the number of versions of each product (why h a 2 product changed so often?) 4 Link between CM and Change Control 2 5 CM keeps records and a copy of every version 2 6 CM records who h produced each product 2 7 Link to Work Package 2 8 Link to QR 2 9 Level of CM should relate to level of product being supplied by 1 contractor (i.e. a one-to-one) 10 Link between configuration item and product descriptions 2 11 Link to Stage Quality Plan would allow more focus on quality 2 checking, i.e. who should be involved Total 26 Version 3.0 (Status Live) Page 12 Document Owner Nicola Kelly The APM Group This document is not to be re-produced or re-sold without express permission from The APM Group

13 Question 10 If the project manager w responsible for the late reporting of slippage, what PRINCE2 controls and sub-processes would have sisted in avoiding this? Q10 1 Set stage tolerances (2) particularly for time (2) at each end stage 8 sessment (2) Senior management to set project tolerances (2) 2 Use CS2 to monitor slippage 2 3 Use CS5 (1) to review any slippage against stage (2) & project (1) 4 tolerances 4 Use Highlight Reports (2) CS6 (1) to comments on small 5 slippages if Project Board action can correct matters (2) 5 Project Assurance (1) particularly Business Assurance (2) to 5 check on progress versus tolerances (2) 6 Exception process (1) Project Issue (1) CS3 (1) CS4 (1) impact 13 analysis (1) CS8 (1) Exception Report (1 for name, 2 for contents) DP4 (1) Exception Plan (1) SB6 (1) DP3 (1) Total 37 Version 3.0 (Status Live) Page 13 Document Owner Nicola Kelly The APM Group This document is not to be re-produced or re-sold without express permission from The APM Group

14 Question 11 Identify and describe the element within PRINCE2 that would address the problem posed by the competitor s product. How might that affect this situation? Q11 1. Management of Risk 2 2. Risk analysis steps (2 for all, 1 for less) 2 3. Risk actions (2 for all, 1 for less) 2 4. Risk management steps (2 for all, 1 for less) 2 5. Risk Log (1) created in SU4 (1) 2 6. Risk owner (2) allocated to (1 for Project Board, 2 for 4 Executive/Senior User) 7. Reviewing risk in SB, DP1, DP2, DP3 (1 each) 4 8. Risk may have been mentioned in Mandate (2) or Brief (2) 4 9. Mention beating competitors to the marketplace part of 4 Project Initiation Document (2) part of Business Ce (2) 10. Review of risk at DP1 (1) DP2 (1) might have led to decision 2 not to do the project 11. Reviewing risk status part of CS Use of Project Issue if any change to situation (2) Issue Log (1) CS7 (1) could react if within tolerances (1) or CS8 could escalate 3 it (1) 14. CS6 (1) Describe risk status part of Highlight Report (1) 4 under Actual or Potential Problems (2) 15. Exception Report (1 for mention, 2 for content) DP4 Ad Hoc Direction keeping an eye on risk Possible premature close of project (2) proposed in SB5 (2) 6 approved in DP3 (2) Total 50 Version 3.0 (Status Live) Page 14 Document Owner Nicola Kelly The APM Group This document is not to be re-produced or re-sold without express permission from The APM Group