Group 12: Project 1

Engineering Project Management Web Based Projects

PROJECT 1: FILM PRIORITIZATION CASE STUDY,

CHAPTER 2

FINAL REPORT

Demonstrator: - Ms. Sandra Cowan

Team Members: - Daniel Svensson

Jing Xiao
Lakshan Gamage
Syed Farhad Hassan Kazmi
Yang Liu

Project Managers: - Haihan Ding

Sahibjit Singh

1
 Group 12: Project 1

Index:
Introduction ...............3

Main Deliverables............4
1. Compilation of the Individual Priority Sheets.............................................. 4
2. Final Priority and Analysis............................................................................5
3. Evaluation of the Approach...........................................................................6

References.............8

Peer Review.........................................................................................................9

Lessons Learnt...........12

2
 Group 12: Project 1

Introduction:
This final report is the summation of our groups effort in establishing a Priority list for the 1
st

Web Based Project Film Prioritization. We were able to prepare a Priority list through both
individual inputs and group discussion on moodle and with proper reasons explain how we
reached to this conclusion. In addition to the final Priority list, we were also able to
understand through deep discussion the relevance of this type of methodology for Proposal
Prioritization. This report contains the summaries of all the detailed proposal discussions
and the final verdict regarding each proposal. Secondly, a final Proposal priority has been
established which was a result of the in depth discussion of each proposal. Thirdly, we were
able to add an evaluation of how this kind of an approach shall be beneficial during proposal
selection in the future.

3
 Group 12: Project 1

Main Deliverables:

1. Compilation of the Individual Priority Sheets

This is the compilation of the individual forms filled by the team

Must Objectives Must meet if Impacts 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Meets all safety and Y= Yes;N= No;N.A.=Not
Y Y N Y Y Y Y
environmental standards Applicable
Y= Yes;N= No;N.A.=Not
PG or G rating Y Y N Y Y Y Y
Applicable
No adverse effect on other Y= Yes;N= No;N.A.=Not
N Y N Y Y Y Y
operations Applicable
Relative Single Project Weighted Weighted Weighted Weighted Weighted Weighted Weighted
Want Objectives Importance
Score Score Score Score Score Score Score
1-100 Impact definitions
Be Nominated for 0= No Potential; 1=
60 0 120 0 120 60 120 60
the Best Picture of Mild Potential; 2= High
Create a New Major 0= No Potential; 1=
20 20 0 0 40 0 40 0
Animated Character Mild Potential; 2= High
Generate Additional 0= No Potential; 1=
10 10 20 10 20 10 10 0
Merchandise Mild Potential; 2= High
Raise Environmental 0= No Potential; 1=
55 110 0 0 110 0 110 110
Concerns Mild Potential; 2= High
Generate Profit 0 < 18%; 1= 18-22%;
70 70 140 70 140 0 70 70
greater than 18% 2>22%
Advance State of 0= No Impact; 1= Some
40 40 0 0 80 0 80 0
Film Animation impact; 2= Great
Provide Basis for 0= No Potential; 1=
10 0 10 0 20 0 20 0
New Theme Rides Mild Potential; 2= High
Total Weighted Score 250 290 80 530 70 450 240
Priority 6 3 7 1 5 2 4
Shelved Shelved

1.1 Proposal 1: This Proposal although a great movie with a lot of scope of generating
additional income from merchandise or by a new animated character is unable to meet one of
the Must objectives, the conglomerate has plans to expand its theme park business to
Mainland China but the complicated Socio-Political relationship between China and Dalai
Lama[1][2] might hinder that project.
1.2 Proposal 2: The film being made on a very high budget with exceptional music and
breathtaking scenery of Swiss Alps makes it a probable film for Academy awards. It also has
a very solid chance of creating additional merchandise as well as getting a high ROI .Overall
a good proposition.
1.3 Proposal 3: All of us have felt that the content (especially the drug abuse) of this film
shall definitely be of mature nature and getting a PG/G rating is not possible [3]. Also this
shall not meet the safety and environmental standards too. Secondly this film doesnt seem
that lucrative too with no chances of any Academy awards nomination or creating an

4
 Group 12: Project 1

animated character. Most of us do feel that the film might get additional merchandise in form
of audio discs etc.
1.4 Proposal 4: We all feel this film has a larger potential of being nominated for the Oscars,
along with it the animal characters have a chance of starring in their own spin off series. Also
these animals could be sold as stuffed toys like other famous film characters like toys from
Toy Story Toy Story(Disney&Pixar,1995) & Madagascar(DreamWorks animation,2005)[4].
The story depicts the harsh effects of deforestation on the lives of animals as well as the
environment which is getting this a high potential in raising environmental concerns [5].
1.5 Proposal 5: Overall it seems to be a very feeble project. It is indeed a sports biography
and maybe it could score a nomination in the Academy awards. We could also generate some
additional merchandise in the form of sports equipment but that also has a very mild
potential. Apart from this the proposal has no features for it to be considered a good project.
1.6 Proposal 6: Like Proposal 4, this also seems to be a promising storyline. Along with
meeting all the Must objectives, this film has a huge potential of being nominated for the
Academy awards. We also felt that this film has a high potential of raising the issue of
animals in captivity and its effect on natural balance [6]. Another very positive feature in this
film shall be the great impact the advanced animation will have on the firms reputation.
1.7 Proposal 7: A medium budget film has a mild potential of getting a nomination. The
positive point of this movie is that the environmental concerns it is raising. Looking at the
ROI we feel that it will do above 18% but has a low chance to perform above 22%.

2. Final Priority and Analysis:-

Through extensive brainstorming and heavy evaluation we are able to establish the final
priority list. Out of the 7 Proposal we found that Proposal 1 and Proposal 3 were not able to
satisfy all the Must Objectives. As the company requires that all the projects under its banner
need to comply fully with all the Must requirements we feel that these two projects should be
shelved. The priority list is as follows:

1) Proposal 4
2) Proposal 6
3) Proposal 2
4) Proposal 7
5) Proposal 5
6, 7) Proposal 1&3 (Rejected due to non compliance with Must objectives)
We are able to establish a few findings based on this analysis:-
1) We feel that the company has an inclination towards producing animated movies, as
additional points are kept for animations.
2) As per the new initiative of the company those films which are raising any kind of
environmental concerns are also given importance.

5
 Group 12: Project 1

3) The strategic mission of the company suggests that the projects need to create value for
stakeholders from a Creative, Financial and Strategic standpoint. For this, films that have a
high chance of getting a nomination in the academy awards are preferred, also those films
that have an ability of generating additional income through merchandise also score high.
4) Necessity of all the proposals to perfectly align with the compliance policies of the firm.
These policies are more focused on maintaining the reputation of the firm in the global
market and in case any proposal doesnt satisfy these, they are bound to be rejected.

3. Evaluation of the Approach:

The next task of this project was to analyse and evaluate the approach used by us for
establishing the Priority list. An essential part of Portfolio Management of any company is
that the Projects should be in accordance with the Strategic Mission of the Company [7].It is
the responsibility of the Project Manager to make sure that the team is thinking on the lines of
the Companys Strategy. If this doesnt happen they make serious mistakes such as focusing
on irrelevant low strategic problems or tend to not focus on the whole market but the
immediate customer [8].
Projects are basically classified into three types namely Compliance, Strategic and
Operational. We used the Multi weighted Model for evaluation of all the Proposals .Out of
these the Must Objectives in our opinion represent the Compliance nature of the Project,
The want Objectives focus on the Strategic nature. This method enables us to look at the
project in a more generic way, giving us a helicopter view of the project.

Multi-Weighted Criteria
Benefits of the approach:-
1) Effectively solves the implementation gap which refers to the lack of
understanding of the corporate strategy amongst the top and middle level
managers of the company [9] and help analyse the feasibility of the project in less
time.
2) It helps in doing a quantitative analysis which minimizes the influence of
internal politics on the selection process
3) Evaluate proposals comprehensively. Thus this method helps understand the
needs of the project in detail.

Limitations of the approach:-

Some key issues with this approach:
1) Subjectivity criteria-A few of the objectives tend to make the approach very
subjective, For e.g. Earning a Nomination in the Academy Awards(opinions tend to
differ a lot on this kind of topic).
2) Co-dependent objectives- The objectives might not be independent and hence
influence the other objectives too for e.g. film that won the award may almost
certainly create a new major animated character but still receives full points from both
objectives even though the first implies the latter. ("Advance State of Film
Animation, Create a New Major Animated Character" )

6
 Group 12: Project 1

Conclusion:
In our opinion although the financial model does help understand the overall scope of any
project but it is absolutely limited to the economic impact of the project and hence fails to
consider the implications of other factors governing the project. Whereas the Multi-Weighted
criteria because of its flexibility to favour different kinds of classifications of projects based
on their weights is very beneficial.

'

7
 Group 12: Project 1

References:
[1] Jaime FlorCruz, CNN Beijing Bureau Chief, February 18, 2010, accessed 11th March
2017<http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapcf/02/18/analysis.china.dalai.lama/>
[2] BBC Asia Pacific, August 15, 2011, accessed 11th March
2017<http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-pacific-14533879>
[3] Understand the Film Rating System, MPAA, accessed 11th March 2017 <
http://www.mpaa.org/film-ratings/>
[4] Toy Story Collection, accessed 11th March 2017 (EBay Store Austalia)
< http://www.ebay.com.au/bhp/toy-story-collection>,Madagascar Collection (Ebay Store
Australia) < http://www.ebay.com.au/bhp/madagascar-toys>)
[5] Scott Wallace, National Geographic Magazine, accessed 19th
March2017<http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/habitats/last-of-
amazon/>
[6] PETA, Zoos-Pitiful Prisons, Accessed 11th March
2017< http://www.peta.org/issues/animals-in-entertainment/animals-used-entertainment-
factsheets/zoos-pitiful-prisons/>
[7]Project Management the managerial process by Larson and Gray, 5th Edition, Chapter 1,
Page 14, Mcgraw-Hill Irwin
[8] J.P. Decamps (Project Management the managerial process by Larson and Gray,5th
Edition , Chapter 2, Page 24, McGraw-Hill Irwin
[9] Project Management the managerial process by Larson and Gray, 5th Edition, Chapter 2,
Page 33, McGraw-Hill Irwin

8
 Group 12: Project 1

Peer Review:

The marking criterion used by us was heavily based on the overall involvement of the peers
in the group activity during the whole tenure of the project.
The Marking Scheme was as follows.

Performance
Description Marks
Parameters
Getting involved in the discussion activity throughout the
Regular Participation 3
project
Innovative Giving innovative solutions/ replies that have contributed
3
Suggestions in the final summarization of each activity
Co-operating and understanding the problems of the team-
Co-Operation mates/Project Managers and helping them out in those 2
situations
Team Coordination
Keep the activities in accordance to the schedule and not
and Schedule 2
miss the deadlines
Following
Total 10

Daniel Svensson:

Performance Parameters Marks

Regular Participation 3/3
Innovative suggestions 3/3
Cooperation 2/2

Team Coordination and Schedule Following 2/2

Total Score 10/10

Daniel had shown a keen eye for detail and throughout the project had given valuable points
for the completion of the project. Job well done!

9
 Group 12: Project 1

Yang Liu

Performance Parameters Marks

Regular Participation 3/3
Innovative suggestions 2/3
Cooperation 2/2
2/2
Team Coordination and Schedule Following

Total Score 9/10

Yang Liu was always one of the first one to put his posts and actively participated during
each and every activity. He also gave excellent references which added weight age to his
posts Keep up the good work.

Jing Xiao

Performance Parameters Marks

Regular Participation 3/3
Innovative suggestions 1/3
Cooperation 2/2
Team Coordination and Schedule Following 2/2

Total Score 8/10

Jing Xiao never missed a single post and always share his views on time, secondly none of
his posts were written without acknowledging his team members. He has amazing group
discussion and forum etiquettes. Amazing work.

Lakshan Gamage

Performance Parameters Marks

Regular Participation 1/3
Innovative suggestions 2/3
Cooperation 2/2
1/2
Team Coordination and Schedule Following

Total Score 6/10

A few of Lakshans posts were actually very interesting and valuable, but his participation
was comparatively less, in our view he should try and manage his time properly and increase
participation to improve the projects quality.

10
 Group 12: Project 1

Syed Farhad Hassan Kazmi

Performance Parameters Marks

Regular Participation 2/3

Innovative suggestions 1/3

Cooperation 2/2

Team Coordination and Schedule Following 2/2

Total Score 7/10

Syed kept a consistent participation during the initial phase of the project, but we missed him
during the final stages, apart from this his amazing cooperation with the team is actually
commendable.

11
 Group 12: Project 1

Lessons Learnt:
The mission of the project was to understand the methodology of analysing proposals for a
project and through group effort with the use of various models select and prioritize the
projects accordingly.
On completing this project we are able to:-
1. Successfully make a project plan and execute it accordingly.
2. Understand that the nature of the projects is fluid and slight changes in the schedule of
the project might be needed to cope up with the requirements of the project.
3. Usage of Multi-Weighted criteria to analyse and prioritize the project proposals. Also
understand the scope of all other selection methods.
4. Differentiate between the various needs and other requirements of the projects.
5. Able to correlate the project with the strategic mission of the company.
6. Effectively communicate the benefits of using this kind of an approach for selection
of the project.

12