Scribd
Upload
5 views3 pages

Solution 1

The Website Revamp System project aims to enhance the user experience of a web learning platform over a 6-month period, starting in January 2024. Key milestones include planning, prototype development, user testing, and a final launch by June 2024, with a budget of $50,000. Stakeholders include an Administrator with high power and interest, students with low power but high interest, and a development team with medium power, all requiring regular updates and communication to ensure project success.

Uploaded by

Nguyễn Hà Linh
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as TXT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
5 views3 pages

Solution 1

The Website Revamp System project aims to enhance the user experience of a web learning platform over a 6-month period, starting in January 2024. Key milestones include planning, prototype development, user testing, and a final launch by June 2024, with a budget of $50,000. Stakeholders include an Administrator with high power and interest, students with low power but high interest, and a development team with medium power, all requiring regular updates and communication to ensure project success.

Uploaded by

Nguyễn Hà Linh
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as TXT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Request 1:

Project Name: Website Revamp System


Purpose/Objectives: The venture points to redesign and improve the user experience
(UX) of a web learning platform. The most objective is to create the stage simpler
to utilize, increment client engagement, and optimize the interface for portable
devices. By addressing issues like moderate stacking times, confusing route, and
obsolete plan, the extend intends to create the stage more available and move
forward client satisfaction. This, in turn, will help increment the number of
course sign-ups.
Timeframe: The project is temporary, with a set duration of 6 months. It will begin
in January 2024 and is expected to conclude by June 2024.
Project Milestones:
- January 2024 – Planning Phase: Define goals, gather requirements, and finalize
the design blueprint.
- February 2024 – Prototype Development: Build wireframes and initial mockups for
the platform’s homepage and key learning pages.
- March 2024 – User Testing & Feedback: Conduct usability testing with a select
group of students and instructors. Collect feedback to refine designs.
- April 2024 – Development Phase: Start coding the new design, including mobile
optimization.
- May 2024 – Quality Assurance & Bug Fixes: Conduct thorough testing for
functionality, responsiveness, and security.
- June 2024 – Launch: Release the new version of the platform to all users. Perform
analysis and optimization.
Project Constraints:
- Cost: Budget is capped at $50,000, including all development, design, and
testing.
- Resources: The project team consists of 1 project manager, 2 UX/UI designers, 3
developers, and 2 testers.
- Quality: The new design must be intuitive, mobile-responsive, and accessible,
meeting WCAG 2.1 accessibility standards.

Request 2:
Stakeholder 1: Administrator
- Power: High power – The Administrator has decision-making authority and budget
control.
- Interest: High interest – The Administrator is invested in the success of the
project as it directly impacts the business’s reputation and revenue.
- Awareness: Fully aware – The Administrator is actively involved in the project
and has clear expectations for results.
- Resistance: Not resistant – The Administrator supports the project as it aligns
with company g
- Strategy: Frequent updates through formal meetings. Provide progress reports,
metrics, and projections of ROI.
Stakeholder 2: Students
- Power: Low power – Students do not have direct influence over project decisions.
- Interest: High interest – They are the primary users of the platform and will
benefit directly from improved usability.
- Awareness: Semi-aware – Some students may be unaware of the specific changes, but
they will notice improvements post-launch.
- Resistance: Neutral to slightly resistant – Some users may be hesitant about
change, especially if it involves adjusting to a new interface.
- Strategy: Conduct surveys and feedback sessions during the user testing phase.
Use targeted communications (e.g., email or in-app notifications) to inform users
about the updates.
Stakeholder 3: Development Team
- Power: Medium power – While they do not make executive decisions, their input is
critical for the success of the project.
- Interest: Medium interest – Developers care about the quality of the product but
are not as personally invested as the Administrator or students.
- Awareness: Fully aware – The development team is involved in the daily execution
and understands the technical details of the project.
- Resistance: Neutral – Developers are typically neutral, as they focus on
executing the project as instructed, although they may face challenges with tight
deadlines.
- Strategy: Regular communication through sprint meetings, weekly status updates,
and team collaboration tools to ensure alignment with goals and timelines.

Request 3: Stakeholder 1: Administrator


- Information: Project updates, milestones achieved, budget status, user feedback.
- Purpose: To keep the Administrator informed about the project's progress,
timeline, and financial health. Ensures alignment with business goals.
- Frequency: Bi-weekly.
- Method/Format: Email summary with charts/graphs; bi-weekly meetings (via Zoom or
in-person) to discuss progress and issues.
- Responsible: Project Manager.
- Review By: Project Manager and Administrator.
Stakeholder 2: Students
- Information: Updates on UX improvements, new features, usability enhancements.
- Purpose: To inform students about new features and improvements that will make
their learning experience smoother and more efficient.
- Frequency: Monthly.
- Method/Format: Email newsletter, blog posts, and in-platform notifications.
- Responsible: Marketing team (for email/newsletters), UX team (for updates on
features).
- Review By: Project Manager, Marketing Manager, UX Lead.
Stakeholder 3: Development Team
- Information: Technical updates, milestones, design changes, feedback from testing
phases.
- Purpose: To ensure developers have the latest requirements, understand changes,
and can proceed with the implementation in a timely manner.
- Frequency: Weekly.
- Method/Format: Team meetings (via Zoom or Slack), project management tool updates
(e.g., Jira/Asana).
- Responsible: Project Manager, Technical Lead.
Review By: Project Manager, Technical Lead.

Request 4:
Duration of Each Path:
- Path 1: A -> B -> C -> D -> E -> F -> G
Duration: 4 + 2 + 3 + 8 + 5 + 7 + 3 = 32 days
- Path 2: A -> B -> C -> E -> F -> G
Duration: 4 + 2 + 3 + 5 + 7 + 3 = 24 days
- Path 3: A -> B -> D -> F -> H -> I
Duration: 4 + 2 + 8 + 7 + 8 + 3 = 32 days
- Path 4: A -> C -> D -> E -> F -> G
Duration: 4 + 3 + 8 + 5 + 7 + 3 = 30 days
- Path 5: A -> B -> C -> D -> F -> G
Duration: 4 + 2 + 3 + 8 + 7 + 3 = 27 days
- Path 6: A -> B -> H -> I
Duration: 4 + 2 + 8 + 3 = 17 days
Critical Path: A -> B -> C -> D -> E -> F -> G or A -> B -> D -> F -> H -> I
Duration: 32 days
The critical path is the longest path, which is either A -> B -> C -> D -> E -> F -
> G or A -> B -> D -> F -> H -> I, both having a duration of 32 days.
This path determines the overall project duration. Any delay in activities along
the critical path will directly affect the project’s completion time.
Request 5:
Schedule Performance Index (SPI): SPI= EV/PV = 2.3 million/2.8 million = 0.82
Cost Performance Index (CPI): CPI = EV/AC= 2.3 million / 2.1 million = 1.10
Schedule Variance (SV): SV=EV−PV=2.3million−2.8million=−0.5million
Cost Variance (CV): CV=EV−AC=2.3 million−2.1 million=0.2 million
Estimate at Completion (EAC): EAC=TotalPlannedCost / CPI=6 million / 1.10=5.45
million
Estimate to Complete (ETC): ETC=EAC−AC=5.45 million−2.1 million=3.35 million
Summary of Findings and Recommendations:
The project is behind schedule, with an SPI of 0.82 and a schedule variance (SV) of
-0.5 million dollar, indicating delays. To recover, actions like reallocating
resources, prioritizing critical tasks, and increasing working hours may be
necessary. On the cost side, the project is performing well, with a CPI of 1.10 and
a cost variance (CV) of + 0.2 million dollar, suggesting it is under budget. The
project is forecasted to cost 5.45 million dollar, which is below the 6 million
dollar budget, but the schedule delay needs to be addressed.
Recommended Adjustments:
- Schedule: Accelerate work by reallocating resources, increasing workforce, or
streamlining processes.
- Cost: Continue to monitor costs carefully, but no immediate action is needed to
reduce spending, as the project is under budget.
- Monitoring: Regularly track both schedule and cost performance to ensure the
project stays on track and make adjustments as needed.
=> By addressing the schedule delays while maintaining cost efficiency, the project
can potentially be completed under budget, though extra effort will be needed to
meet the original timeline.

You might also like