Describe the main characteristics of the project in terms of people, technology, resources and institutions involved.
Discuss About The International Conference On Software System.
Concord can be considered as a milestone project of the twentieth century in Aviation engineering, which was developed by a successful collaboration between French and British aviation industries. The project developed the first supersonic aircraft for commercial transportation, and was one of its kinds, being able to travel at twice the speed of sound, and travel between New York and London in about 3 hours. The project started the estimated cost was about 135 million British Pounds, which was supported by the collaboration between the British and French Governments. However, the project suffered significantly due to an inefficient management committee structure and inappropriate contracting and controls, excessive stages of prototype development and the problems related with advanced technologies involved in the project, along with an unfavorable environment of inflation. These factors have caused significant losses for the aviation industry due to the project, and have been considered as a financial disaster. However, the project was still successful to deliver the groundbreaking technology and create the first supersonic aircrafts for passenger transportation. Even though the project ended up costing 500 million British Pounds in 1970, which attracted significant criticisms, the project could still be considered successful in the context of creating an amazing aircraft, which was not only advanced but also had a reliable performance record and serve as a milestone in the history of European Aviation industry (Morris & Hough, 1987).
The people and institutions involved in the project were: the members of Transport Aircraft Committee (STAC), British Aircraft Corporation (BAC), Bristol Siddley Engines, SNECMA, a steering committee of officials from UK and France. The technological aspects involved were research in aerodynamics, strength and aero elasticity, structures, systems, weight and centre of gravity for the new aircraft. The resources needed were financial and technological support (Morris & Hough, 1987; Wilson, 1973).
It was expected initially during the project that the costs of the project could be covered in about 135.2 million British Pounds. It was also expected that the project would run longer that it actually did, and that the project would be able to bring in profits to the industry (Morris & Hough, 1987; Wilson, 1973).
In actuality, the Concorde project ended up exceeding the initial budget and the industry i9ncurred significant losses in the attempt to keep Concorde functional. A lot of the overheads in the costs of the projects were attributed to inefficient management and structure of the committees, inappropriate contracting and control strategies, too many developments of prototypes and challenges with the advanced technologies involved (Morris & Hough, 1987; Wilson, 1973).
What people expected from the project in terms of cost, time and performance?
The major drawback of the project was due to the exceeding costs of the project, however in the context of the design and performance of the Concorde airplane, the project was a success, as was versioned by the designers, and was able to deliver performance as expected in the project. Hence, in such aspect there was not considerable difference, however on the financial standpoint there was a huge gap between the estimated and actual costs (Morris & Hough, 1987; Wilson, 1973).
The project was initiated by the UK in 1956 (October) under Anthony Edence governance, which resulted in the setup of the Supersonic Transport Aircraft Committee (STAC). The goal was to study further in supersonic aircraft designing (Morris & Hough, 1987; Wilson, 1973).
The main stakeholders were the British and French Governments and Aviation industries (Morris & Hough, 1987)The Cynefin Model:
The Cynefin Model is a conceptual framework that can be used to support decision making process. It can thus be understood as a ‘sense making devise’ that identifies 5 domains in the context of decision making such as: simple/obvious, complicated, complex, chaotic and disorder. These domains can be used by managers to understand how they comprehend the situations and help them to assess their own behavior as well as of others. The model draws from the studies on network and systems theories and learning theories (Snowden, 2000).
Outlining the various aspects of the project into the five domains can help to understand how the different variables have affected the project. Discussed below is how the model can help to
Identifying the Simple/Obvious domain can help to understand the best practices in a stable situation, and sets up standard plans of action. However, the process of categorizing situations in this domain can lead to oversimplification of the situation and cause ‘entrained’ thought processes and complacency (O’Connor & Lepmets, 2015; Snowden, 2002). This can be useful in the current context, as it can help to understand the standard actions applicable by the management of Concorde.
The ‘complicated’ domain comprises of the factors which can be considered as ‘known unknowns’ which can involve sensing, analyzing and responding to situations to apply effective practices. Identifying factors in this domain can be useful for analyzing difficult scenarios, and find out solutions to them, as well as analyze every possible actions, or sequences of actions that can be applicable in the scenario (Stogsdill & Ulfvengren, 2017). For the Concorde project, this domain can be useful for identifying all the possible action that could have been taken by the management, to avoid the problems.
What were the real outcomes?
Identifying the factors under the domain ‘complex’ can involve the ‘unknown unknowns’, which allows the cause effect to be analyzed in hindsight. This can be used to develop instructive patterns. This domain allows the representation of the complex interactions between the cause and effect, and is impervious to the reductionist approach (O’Connor & Lepmets, 2015; Snowden, 2002). This domain is able to address how actions can leads to change in the situation in an unpredictable way, and hence can be very useful to analyze the Concorde case, to identify how the actions of the management lead to the budget of the project exceeding the estimations.
The ‘chaotic’ domain comprises of factors which are too chaotic to use a response based on knowledge base. This domain thus involves factors which does not have any precedence, and thus prevents any pre planned actions to be considered beforehand. Thus, any actions can be included as they are the only known ways of responding to the situation. This domain helps to reduce the adverse effects of a situation on the management (Ziadat et al., 2017). In the Concord case, this domain can be useful to identify where stability lies and where it is absent, and the situation can then be transferred from the ‘chaotic’ domain to the ‘complex’ domain, and thus identify patterns that can be useful to prevent future situations and find out new opportunities.
The ‘disorder’ domain involves situations that lack clarity regarding which of the other domains arte applicable for the given scenario. Scenarios under this domain can have multiple perspectives, which can lead to arguments in the management and lead to chaos (Czinki & Hentschel, 2016). To get out of this domain, the situation must therefore be broken down into its smaller parts, and each of the parts can then be ascribed to a particular domain, and thus help the management to identify an effective intervention process.
The Concorde project shows how organizations can face challenges due to the pressures and the nature of the business, which highlights the necessity of effective strategies of knowledge management. The management of Concorde was criticized for being ineffective in structuring its committee, and extra expenditure caused due to inappropriate processes of contracting and the excessive investment in the development of the prototypes, which were not completely necessary (Munns & Bjeirmi, 1996). Effective Knowledge Management strategies can ensure effective learning from these situations and allow the identification of steps to prevent its recurrence. Effective KM strategy must not only be able to support a knowledge enabled system, but also understand the key needs and challenges in the organization, and help to develop framework to address such factors. Thus, effective KM can be vital for business managers as well as to support innovation and develop organizational environment (Power et al., 2015; Wang et al., 2014). The proposed KM strategy can include a bottom up approach, where activities of the staff can be analyzed to understand the key needs and challenges that need to be addressed (Ludlow et al., 2015). The approach can involve 5 steps: Step 1: Identifying staff that can give the best business value or involved in the most crucial parts of the project. Step 2: Comprehensive and holistic analysis of the needs along with the staff identified in step 1. Step 3: Inputs from the senior management, organizational strategy frameworks are used to devise a strategic focus. Step 4: Developing recommendations to address the issues. Step 5: Implementing strategic and tactical initiatives based on the recommendations of step 4 (tlu.ee, 2018).
Was there too much difference between the expected and real outcomes?
The mechanism of the transfer of knowledge can be done through 7 inter related processes. These include: 1. Creation of knowledge (through well trained employees, effective selection in context to the objectives embedded in the tolerant and receptive medium and fosters effective encouragement to the staff and allows proper education and achievement of the orientation). 2. Acquisition of Knowledge (which can include quick response to innovation, allow institutional support of innovations and quick development of knowledge). 3. Retention of Knowledge (which can be done through loyalty rewards to employees and installing knowledge bases. 4. Identification of Knowledge (which can help to create a clear vision of future and recording of experience). 5. Knowledge Distribution (through which individuals can be encourage to share and distribute knowledge and information and also help to measure performance. 6. Transfer of Knowledge (which can involve designing of channels and strategies for the transfer of different types of knowledge and establishing a technical context to it. 7. Reception of Knowledge (which can be done by institutionalizing the process of information exchange in the organization) (tlu.ee, 2018; Faisal et al., 2017). Different models of KM can be utilized in the dissemination of knowledge in the organization, such as 1. The Routine Oriented Model, 2. Project Oriented Model, 3. Person-Oriented Model. 4. Model based on Intellectual Property Protection. 5. IT based Model. The strengths of the selected KM model include the strategically splitting of the different situations into its component structures to facilitate learning (Argote & Ingram, 2000). It divides the process of knowledge management into steps which involves creation of the knowledge, acquiring the knowledge created, retaining and then distributing the knowledge which can then be transferred to others through channels of knowledge reception and thus be utilized in the business. The weakness of the process is that it lengthens the process of analyzing the knowledge, trying to strategize every information within the given framework. For complicated knowledge, based on several etiologies, or knowledge that is constantly evolving, identifying the various steps identified above can be a difficult process (Sarala et al., 2016).
In complex process therefore, learning can be achieved through effective Knowledge Management strategies, which can help to create a knowledge base of information, and thus help to avoid situations being in the ‘disorder’ or ‘chaotic’ categories, and help to devise strategies to avoid their recurrence. Effective knowledge management can also help in the effective sharing of the best practices and information through the organization, thereby fostering productivity and adherence of the business goals and objectives and maintain focus of the project outlines (Kaszás et al., 2016). In the Concorde project, effective KM can be helpful to understand how the various aspects have resulted in the underperformance of the project, especially in relation to the over budgeting of the project, and help to identify strategies that can be used to avoid such circumstances. This can foster an environment of learning and excellence, where past mistakes are used as an opportunity to learn which is further reinforced with knowledge gathered from research and literature, to build a stable knowledge base, which can be used to inform managerial decisions of the organization. However, this process can also complicate the process of acquiring simple knowledge which has clear cause effect relations, as the management tries to calibrate the process according to the stages of the knowledge development, distribution and acquisition (Najafi-Tavani et al., 2015). It is vital therefore that the context if the knowledge must be considered in orders to understand which knowledge needs to be structured in the Knowledge Management process.
Who initiated the project, and why?
IN the Project for Learning (PfL), these strategies for Knowledge Management can be useful to understand the effective means of managing information in a structured manner so as to create knowledge from the information (Gary, 2015). This is a vital step towards the creation of knowledge bases, and thus helps other employees to increase their understanding of the concepts. In the PfL, the KM strategies can help to understand how knowledge from the case study can be assimilated to theory and practice, and thus foster both personal and professional development. Similarly, different mechanisms to transfer the knowledge is also helpful to understand how the knowledge can be shared within the organization in an efficient and meaningful way and how this can in turn facilitate the process of learning and continued development of the skills of the employees in the organization (Sarala et al., 2016). In the Concorde case study, applying effective KM strategies and mechanisms to transfer knowledge can play a pivotal role in addressing the various challenges faced by the management regarding the performance of the project and the cost affectivity of the processes involved in the project.
Conclusion:
Even though the Concorde project was successful in the development of the first commercial supersonic aircraft, the ineffective structure of the managing committee, and ineffective management processes led to a financial disaster, as the project far exceeded the initial budget, which serious jeopardized the continuation and over all sustainability of the project. The inability of the manage to avoid or tackle the problems highlights the need to frameworks of action that can be taken in different situations. The Cynefin model helps to differentiate various situations into five domains, based on the known and unknown variables, and helps the managerial decision making process. Additionally, effective knowledge management is also important in the effective sharing of information, and creation of knowledge based which can be used to reference different situation and identify the correct course of action to prevent its recurrence.
References:
Argote, L., & Ingram, P. (2000). Knowledge transfer: A basis for competitive advantage in firms. Organizational behavior and human decision processes, 82(1), 150-169.
Czinki, A., & Hentschel, C. (2016). Solving complex problems and TRIZ. Procedia CIRP, 39, 27-32.
Faisal, R., Chong, A. L., & Yee, A. S. V. (2017). Systematic Review of Sustainable Knowledge Transfer Process in Government-Industry-Academia Consortium. Asian Journal of Innovation and Policy, 6, 295-312.
Gary, K. (2015). Project-based learning. Computer, 48(9), 98-100.
Kaszás, N., Peter, E., Keller, K., & Kovács, T. (2016). Boundless opportunities with definite limitations. Deturope-The Central European Journal Of Regional Development And Tourism, 8(1), 5-20.
Ludlow, D., Khan, Z., Soomro, K., Marconcini, M., José, R. S., Malcorps, P., … & Metz, A. (2017). From top-down land use planning intelligence to bottom-up stakeholder engagement for smart cities-a case study: DECUMANUS service products. International Journal of Services Technology and Management, 23(5-6), 465-493.
Morris, P. W., & Hough, G. H. (1987). The anatomy of major projects: A study of the reality of project management.
Munns, A. K., & Bjeirmi, B. F. (1996). The role of project management in achieving project success. International journal of project management, 14(2), 81-87.
Najafi-Tavani, Z., Zaefarian, G., Henneberg, S. C., Naudé, P., Giroud, A., & Andersson, U. (2015). Subsidiary knowledge development in knowledge-intensive business services: a configuration approach. Journal of International Marketing, 23(4), 22-43.
O’Connor, R. V., & Lepmets, M. (2015, August). Exploring the use of the cynefin framework to inform software development approach decisions. In Proceedings of the 2015 International Conference on Software and System Process (pp. 97-101). ACM.
Power, D. J., Sharda, R., & Burstein, F. (2015). Decision support systems. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Sarala, R. M., Junni, P., Cooper, C. L., & Tarba, S. Y. (2016). A sociocultural perspective on knowledge transfer in mergers and acquisitions. Journal of Management, 42(5), 1230-1249.
Snowden, D. (2000). Cynefin, a sense of time and place: an ecological approach to sense making and learning in formal and informal communities.
Snowden, D. (2002). Complex acts of knowing: paradox and descriptive self-awareness. Journal of knowledge management, 6(2), 100-111.
Stogsdill, M., & Ulfvengren, P. (2017). Mapping Risk Models/Methods onto a Complexity Spectrum. In INAIR 2017. Elsevier.
tlu.ee. (2018). Knowledge Management Strategy | Strategic and planning issues of KM. Retrieved from https://www.tlu.ee/~sirvir/IKM/Strategic_Issues/knowledge_management_strategy.html
Wang, S., Noe, R. A., & Wang, Z. M. (2014). Motivating knowledge sharing in knowledge management systems: A quasi–field experiment. Journal of Management, 40(4), 978-1009.
Wilson, A. (1973). The Concorde Fiasco. Puffin Books.
Ziadat, W., Kirkham, R., & Gardiner, P. (2017, June). On the Edge of Chaos: Complexity Offering Value Expectations on O&G Projects. In SPE Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Annual Technical Symposium and Exhibition. Society of Petroleum Engineers.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
