Working With Constraints Coursework Example

M5D1: Working with Constraints: No unread replies. No replies.
Name of Student
Name of Institution
M5D1: Working with Constraints: No unread replies. No replies.
When there is a change in raw material(s), it becomes quite salient that there is a change(s) in the scope (s) of the project(s). Regardless of the assurance that the material(s) has no ‘negative’ effects, it is importance to acknowledge the management about this course of action. The case study at P2P, for instance, is simply an indication of a failed project manager whose change(s) in the project(s) scope(s) interfered with overall productivity and profitability. The situation would be best addressed by an individual(s) such as P2P’s Prem Gupta, whose role(s) was to surprise the project’s process. A change(s) in material would, for instance, lead to 1) a delay in the project completion 2) disorientation of the team members and 3) an overall change(s) in the project’s direction (Pfeifer et al., 2015). If at all there was no hastened decision(s) to inform the supervisor, the project would incur losses similar to P2P’s particularly due to incompetence from any other parties involved (Gray & Larson, 2014). Even if Prem Gupta handled the project during the last minute, Isaac-the project manager-had created a lot of negative change by altering the project’s course of action. Making the decision, however, would also require inclusion of other team members to acquire Democratically-affiliated results. Single-handedly reporting to the project’s supervisor would not have assisted in the outcome and results, whether positive or negative.

Unfortunately, there is the need to delve into “off-gassing” whether it affects U.S. workers or not. It is apparent that since the manufacturing is in China, there is a possibility that workers in the U.S. will not be in despair. First of all, the issue(s) of material shortage(s) may force the U.S. to import material(s) from China. There is a great possibility of ‘indirectly’ coming across this toxic material(s) that may end up affecting workers in the U.S. as well. Again, material(s) may be imported from China to avoid delaying the completion of this particular project(s). It is important, foremostly, for project managers and supervisors to ensure that all chemicals used undergo chemical analysis. The process will make it easier for these managers to avoid utilization of chemicals that will have negative side effects on the project’s completion. Assurance only should not be enough to ascertain the non-toxic nature of a chemical to be used in the project(s). Most importantly, to avoid importation of toxic materials; both organizations and projects in the U.S. should strive to manufacture their material(s). Shortage(s) of the useful material(s) should not necessarily ‘pressure’ them to import toxic material(s) from China into the U.S.
Apparently, Lee makes claims that the finished products comply with the U.S. regulations for safety. It is quite ironical that the manufacturing company places the interest of U.S. workers before its local and Chinese workers. Evidently, Lee shows that China is still dependent on the U.S. to augur profitability thus; the manufacturing company ensures adherence to the latter’s safety and regulations. By keeping U.S. workers safer than the local workers, the Chinese manufacturing company delves into their dependence on the U.S., as a Western nation. Again, his assumption is that the material(s) will inevitably be exported to the U.S. hence it was important for the production to comply with U.S. regulations (Qin, 2015). The product(s) should first comply with China’s regulation for safety before looking into the place of the U.S. in this situation.
There are particular alternatives that may be integrated into Lee’s final proposal apropos of this issue(s) on raw material(s). It is quite possible that he resorted to looking into the larger manufacturing company because originally, Lee was dealing with one that would slow down the project(s) and its overall course of action. He should have been more patient with the first manufacturing company that did not have any ultimatums such as toxicity and harshness to workers. Lee’s resolution to use a ‘shorter’ process for material production was quite incompetent as he ended up interfering with this material’s safe status among the workers. Even as a new team member, it was obvious that Lee was supposed to improve his focus on the production of non-toxic material(s) that will not affect either the U.S. or Chinese workers. Still delving into the issue(s) of chemical analysis, it is important for Lee to follow up the process to avoid exposing workers to toxic chemicals (Wood, 2011). The assurance that these chemicals are not toxic is not enough to support Lee’s claims and assertions. Additionally, Lee should realize that safety is more important than any quantity of sales; making the assertion that quality surpasses quantity in uncountable instances. When there is an increase in sales and a decrease in production, there is a possibility of losing the former as well. There will be no more sales if the customers understand that the manufacturing company is selling toxic material(s) at the expense of the former’s lives. Lee should, hence, concur with the idea(s) that working on production will bring about more fulfilling results.
References
Gray, C. F., & Larson, E. W. (2014). Project management: The managerial process. New York, NY : McGraw-Hill Education.
Pfeifer, J., Barker, K., Marquez-Ramirez, J.E., & Morshedlou, N. (2015). “Quantifying the risk of project delays with a genetic algorithm.” Int. J. Production Economics.
Qin, T. (2015). Research handbook on Chinese environmental law. Cheltenham, UK : Edward Elgar Publishing.
Wood, D.W. (2011). Vibrant Health Plus: The Real Medical Revolution. ABC Press Incorporated.