You have been appointed by the Australian federal government to provide a critique of the conduct of the $80B Attack Class submarine program. So as not to arouse political suspicion, you are to base your advice exclusively on data contained in the source materials from the Defence Connect website – an article dated 20 January 2020 titled, “$80bn future submarine program runs aground, again”. You are to treat the submarine contract as a continuing effort with no prospect of being halted and restarted in another form. Remember you are producing a consulting report, not a research report. All recommendations must be based exclusively on details contained in the article nominated above. As the tendering and competitive evaluation process is deemed to have been handled well, it is specifically excluded from the scope of your submission.
Please read the press report https://www.defenceconnect.com.au/maritime-antisub/5422-80-billion-future-submarine-program-runs-aground-again
You have been bought into the submarine project to advise the Australian government on the following four questions:
- What do you see as the objectives of the submarine project? Think beyond just the operational requirements and consider all stakeholders and all benchmarks the lead project manager should consider. Which of these objectives are likely to be met? Which are in jeopardy? And why?
- Given that the project takes place on opposite sides of the world (Adelaide, Australia & France), how would you optimize monitoring and control of the project to improve the likelihood of meeting its objectives?
- One stakeholder stated in an interview that he “support(ed) the ANAO’s view that the project risk is high to extreme.” Identify what you consider to be the top four risks you would include in a risk management plan associated with this project. Briefly explain how you would respond to each of these risks.
- Given that this project already uses robust project management methodologies, how might you prevent further “time-frame slippage” referred to in the report?
- Your report should be presented in a report format. It needs to look and sound professional and be suitable for presentation in a Parliamentary debate.
- Please use materials from the subject and academic and professional publications (relevant and recent journal articles and books) to inform your discussion. We advise against using popular websites as the information contained within is frequently incorrect, which may jeopardise the project’s success. A minimum of 8 references should be used to ensure a passing mark.
- We are looking for the thinking that supports your decisions and recommendations and the underpinning logic, not just how well you can repeat what you have been taught or have read.
- Cover page with the topic and student’s name
- Executive summary (less than a page, in paragraphs and bullet points, summarising the important points)
- Table of contents
- Objectives (appropriate headings and/or subheadings for Q1)
- Optimising monitoring and control (appropriate headings and/or subheadings for Q2)
- Risk assessment (appropriate headings and/or subheadings for Q3)
- Management methodologies to prevent time slippage (appropriate headings and/or subheadings for Q4)
- List of references (listed in alphabetical order and Harvard referencing style)