PJM 7210 Module 2 Midterm Essay Assignment Example

Five Questions, One Program: Midterm Essays on Selecting, Scoping, Estimating, Scheduling and Protecting a Lead Line Replacement Project

Student Name

Master of Business Administration, Thomas Edison State University

PJM-7210: Project Management

Mentor Name

Month Day, Year

Five Questions, One Program: Midterm Essays on Selecting, Scoping, Estimating, Scheduling and Protecting a Lead Line Replacement Project

The five essays below answer the midterm questions on Modules 1 and 2 of Larson and Gray (2018). Each draws on one example, the lead service line replacement program at Ramapo Valley Water Authority, a composite public utility in Bergen County, New Jersey, which must replace about 1,200 lead lines, including the customer-owned portions, at an estimated $14.4 million.

Essay 1: Why Should Strategy Drive Project Selection?

Larson and Gray (2018) argue that organizations fail when they choose projects one at a time on their individual merits, because the result is a portfolio that spreads scarce resources across too many efforts unrelated to strategy. A disciplined selection process, with projects classified as compliance, operational or strategic and scored on criteria derived from the organization's goals, ensures that resources go where they matter most. Projects that clearly serve strategy also receive stronger support from top management when conflicts over resources arise. At Ramapo Valley, linking selection to the strategic plan explained why smart meters were funded alongside the mandatory lead program: both advanced the plan's aims of cleaner tap water and fewer leaks, and they shared data.

Essay 2: The Scope Statement and the Work Breakdown Structure

Defining scope is the first step of planning, and Larson and Gray (2018) list the elements of a scope statement: the objective, what will be delivered and when, the technical requirements, the boundaries and exclusions of the work, and reviews with the customer. For the lead program, the objective is to replace all 1,200 lead service lines in full within four years and $14.4 million. Deliverables include a verified service line inventory, a customer consent and communication process, completed replacements and restoration of streets and lawns, and post-replacement water testing. Exclusions matter: the program does not replace interior household plumbing or water mains, except where a main must be opened to reach a line. Full replacement is the goal because partial replacement can raise lead levels for a time (Trueman et al., 2016).

A work breakdown structure breaks the scope down level by level until each piece, a work package, can be estimated, scheduled and given to a single owner. A deliverable-based WBS for this program has five branches: inventory, customer engagement, construction by neighborhood phase, restoration and testing, and project management. Construction is broken down by neighborhood so that each phase of about 150 lines becomes a package with its own crew, budget and schedule.

Essay 3: Estimating Times and Costs

Larson and Gray (2018) distinguish top-down estimates, made early from analogies, ratios or expert judgment, from bottom-up estimates built from work packages. The authority's $14.4 million figure is top-down, based on a cost of about $12,000 per line reported by peer utilities. That is appropriate for early approval but not for control. As design proceeds, a bottom-up estimate should be built for each neighborhood package, accounting for local conditions such as street pavement type, lot setbacks and the share of lines under driveways. The textbook also warns about common sources of error: optimism, padding by people who expect cuts, and failing to include contingency for genuine uncertainty. Separate contingency reserves, rather than hidden padding in each package, keep the estimates honest.

Essay 4: Network Planning and PERT

The pilot phase consists of three sequential activities with uncertain durations, estimated in weeks as optimistic, most likely and pessimistic values: inventory verification (2, 3, 6), design and permits (4, 6, 10) and contractor procurement (1, 2, 3). Using the PERT formula, expected time equals the optimistic value plus four times the most likely value plus the pessimistic value, divided by six, and variance equals the square of one-sixth of the range (Malcolm et al., 1959). The expected times are 3.33, 6.33 and 2.00 weeks, for a total of 11.67 weeks, and the variances 0.444, 1.000 and 0.111, for a total of 1.556 and a standard deviation of about 1.25 weeks.

The probability of finishing the pilot within 14 weeks is found from the standard normal value (14 minus 11.67) divided by 1.25, or about 1.87, which corresponds to roughly a 97 percent chance. The board can therefore commit to a 14-week pilot with reasonable confidence, while a 12-week commitment would carry only about a 60 percent chance of being met.

Essay 5: Managing Risk

The textbook's risk management process has four steps: identify risks, assess them for probability and impact, develop responses and control them as the project proceeds (Larson & Gray, 2018). For the lead program, the main risks are homeowners who refuse access to replace the private portion of their lines, unexpected conditions such as lines under foundations, contractor capacity as many utilities replace lines at once, and cost inflation. Responses follow the textbook's categories. Homeowner refusal is mitigated through early outreach, door-to-door visits and assistance with paperwork. Contractor capacity is reduced by awarding multiyear contracts that guarantee volume. Cost inflation is partly transferred through fixed-unit-price contracts and partly retained in a contingency reserve. Each risk receives an owner and a trigger, and the register is reviewed monthly with the steering committee.

Conclusion

Across the five essays, one program shows how Modules 1 and 2 fit together: strategy-driven selection decides that the project is done, a scope statement and WBS define what it delivers, estimates and PERT analysis set realistic budgets and dates, and a risk register protects the plan. Every step rests on the previous one, which is the logic of project planning the midterm is designed to test.

References

Larson, E. W., & Gray, C. F. (2018). Project management: The managerial process (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.

Malcolm, D. G., Roseboom, J. H., Clark, C. E., & Fazar, W. (1959). Application of a technique for research and development program evaluation. Operations Research, 7(5), 646-669. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.7.5.646

Trueman, B. F., Camara, E., & Gagnon, G. A. (2016). Evaluating the effects of full and partial lead service line replacement on lead levels in drinking water. Environmental Science & Technology, 50(14), 7389-7396. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.6b01912