Eventually, the final project at Verizon was realized at its fullest scope. There was an elimination of the need for ” a resource-draining, in-house application designed for keeping track of labels,” and a “more tightly controlled promotion model that allows developers and managers to know that software builds and deployments are accurate and complete” was created (MKS: Case Study — Verizon Wireless, 2004, MKS). Processes were subject to more standardization with more uniform codes, now “sandboxes that permitted multiple developers to edit same file simultaneously and the enhanced communication between it project teams created cost savings despite the time devoted realizing the completion of the project (MKS: Case Study — Verizon Wireless, 2004, MKS). The scope of the project did not alter so much as it suffered from a time frame that had expanded. Frustrations regarding technological difficulties with mixed operating systems and constructing a uniform code and scheduling approach, and also the need to call in outside consultants increased the budget of the project created further losses, financially and in terms of good will.
Although the final project was successful, more effective use of the knowledge provided by change management studies would have been helpful. The resistance of it professionals, unwilling to share information with others because of fear of losing their territory would be seen as normal. Of the fundamental steps of the change management process the increased urgency and need for change was not clearly communicated on the part of the guiding team at the beginning of the project, despite clarity of the final vision and objective. The unanticipated resistance and poorly communicated preparation for the inevitable interm process made employees less motivated to “empower action,” especially in the absence of “short-term wins” over the transotopm (McConnon 2008, p.12).
It was assumed that because it professionals were largely affected that they would understand that change is inevitable given the limits of the current technology, but regardless, the inevitable change cycle of loss and doubt, followed by discovery, transition, understanding and integration was somewhat forestalled because the expected payoff of better communication and integration of processes was percieved as a threat to certain divisions particular space in the company and not seen as suffienctly beneficial by others to withstand the interm discomfort (Jenkinson 2008).
Resistance, discomfort, and fighting with one another are to be expected in a constrained project that is supposed to produce greater efficiency and organizational efficiency. Facilitating human as well as technological communication between the divisions would have broached some of the difficulties ensued, and budgeting at greater scale for a long-term technological transition operation that would inevitably have short-term snafus as well as long-term savings should have been regarded as essential, as illustrated by Verizons mistakes.
Chatfield, Carl & Timothy Johnson. (2007). A short course in project management. Microsoft Office Project 2007 Step-by-Step. Retrieved 1 Sept 2008. http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/project/HA102354821033.aspx#Project
Jenkinson, Lance. (2008). Change Cycle. Retrieved 1 Sept 2008. CCMC. http://www.changecycle.com/changecycle.htm
McConnon. (2004). Change management. PowerPoint. Retrieved 1 Sept 2008. (http://info.worldbank.org/etools/docs/library/118009/Integrated%20Financial%20Management%20Systems%20in%20Governments%20-%20Nairobi%20(Nov%202004)/Change%20Management.ppt
MKS: Case Study — Verizon Wireless. (2004). MKS. Retrieved 1 Sept 2008. http://download.mks.com/downloads/MKS_casestudy_VerizonWireless.pdf.