Project analysis

Below you will find some feedback to the project group from different perspectives.

Project management

• Oskar understood the need of competences and skills in project management, and prepared with some courses. However, as he was more or less both project manager and project team, he had no time to use the plan as a basis for planning. Consequently, several unidentified risks realized themselves, with severe consequences for the projects results.
• From the tight constraints regarding time schedule and budget, Oskar should have a better plan of how the scope could be limited if needed (i.e. if the project was to exceed time and cost limits).

Stakeholder

• Due to poor project management and changes in the project, Oskar had to work overtime during a long period of time. That was probably one of the main reason why he spent too little time planning the project, which became a vicious circle of additional interruptions during the project itself. More seriously, the situation could cause serious health problems, i.e. high stress levels and lack of recovery.
• The name “Big Five Camp” leads to tourists with expectations and excitement. With only four different wild animals, it became a major risk that tourists could become disappointed and dissatisfied.
• Oskar should have had a discussion with Anders in advance concerning the cost limits (budget). With Anders as a very important stakeholder, Oskar should have identified and discussed Anders’s needs and requirements on the project.

Effectiveness

• The marketing strategy was a success; most of the cottages were already booked from April to August. By that, the project goal seems to be something many tourists will appreciate. Oskar had no formal impact goal, but if the tourists become satisfied with their stay, due the limitations of project scope, the project has been managed effectively.

Efficiency

• Project efficiency is overall about fulfilling the project constraints according to the “Project Management Triangle”. Oskar was forced to keep up with the budget and time constraints, but had to decrease the scope to a large extent.
• Overall, the project was not planned and managed in an efficient way, as Oskar did not have time for the plan or planning.