Case Study Of A Project Failure (TalkTalk Company)
Project Overview
CRM (Customer Relationship Management) is an integrated management system which primarily deals with customers and prospective customers. It contains the procedures and systems that assemble a business administration demonstrate focused on a 360° way to deal with the client.
TalkTalk is the United Kingdom’s one of leading provider of broadband, mobile, and TV services for clients and broadband and telephone services for commercial purposes. TalkTalk was planning to migrate its entire CRM systems from Salesforce to Pega. As a business that rushed to see the capability of putting its corporate applications in the Cloud, Cloud Computing rapidly progressed toward becoming the necessity for the supplier.
Pega systems' essential quality is it brought together engineering in view of an intense business rule management system (BRMS) and predictive examination choice management motor. The stage joins process stream definitions, rule preparing, information dealing with, cross-stage UIs, an entire portable application advancement stage, BAM, content management, case management, application reconciliation and different capacities in a single model-based improvement and runtime design that supports organized and unstructured process styles. TalkTalk contracted Tata Consultancy services for the migration project from Salesforce to Pega.
What went wrong?
Weak Personnel
A team of 12 people were allocated by the resource management group for this migration project. First issue was that, the absence of appropriate space presentation tightened the quantity of individuals who could be met for the undertaking. Facilitate the leads and Project director took up a procedure where they began to contract individuals for the group who could be employed quickest rather than who was fit enough to convey effectively to the customer. In addition, it was expected that recruiting individuals with information of BPM is enough as they will get the Pega knowledge in the end. This was an unfortunate way to deal with the emergency that emerged in the group because of absence of appropriate domain knowledge.
Unrealistic expectations
The team at Tata consultancy was committed to finish the migration of CRM from Salesforce to Pega inside a range of two months without understanding what endeavors and specialized mastery would be required precisely. The poor delineating of the degree made the Project managers and leads accept that the expertise expected to take a shot at this task is rudiments of BPM. Later, they realized that more than BPM, they also need to understand all the functionalities of Pega systems for the successful migration from salesforce. This domain information was thought little of and prompted a considerable measure of perplexity. The customers accepted that the assets comprehended the domain and their languages however the situation was a long way from the real world. It required a considerable measure of exertion and time with respect to the project group to provide and meet the expectations that has been unreasonably set up by the management. Also, these excessively optimistic calendars and showing substandard expectations was negatively influencing the customer's trust and associations with them over the long haul.
Excessive Multitasking
Multitasking has turned out to be excessively normal and has turned out to be excessively of a propensity for us. We eagerly go up against additional assignments, and regularly we don't feel like we're buckling sufficiently down except if we're chipping away at such many things. The most exceedingly profitable groups I've experienced are those that can convey a serious concentration to their work. Not exclusively do they work only on what's most vital, they comprehend that to advance their throughput they should limit the quantity of various things they take a shot at any one time. Convey this same concentration to your work, both separately and as a group. As there were no project delivery heads assigned to review the work of the engineers, the team lead must take the initiative and manage the task that the delivery heads need to do. This not just over loaded the team members in addition the oversaw because of the absence of expertise in assignment and brought about few of the individuals having insignificant assignments while the rest needed to do more multitasking and faced difficulties in achieving objectives.
Wishful Thinking
Individuals that need experience may not understand that there are issues in a project and accordingly expect that things will work out well with no uncommon consideration. Rather than doing the research, working out the subtle elements, and arranging these parts of the project which might be the ones that need the most consideration, numerous individuals seek after the best and spotlight on alternate zones of the project they are more comfortable with. This is an exemplary type of forbearance. Numerous wishful thinkers overestimate their capacity to deal with a specific errand or project or belittle the challenges and snags they are probably going to confront. One cannot expect everyone in the software industry to work and deliver any project that they are assigned.
Assuming Global Development Has Little Impact
Attributable to broadened due dates and absence of value expectations, the marginally unsatisfied customer asked for the group lead to move to their office located in London inside about fourteen days from the beginning of the project keeping in mind the end goal to facilitate and impart between the customer and the group at Tata Consultancy services located in Chennai, India. This left the officially battling group to fight for itself and oversee everything offshore all alone because of the unavailability of the lead in the premises to manage them. The difference in time zones additionally implied that the group lead wasn't accessible for support or clear doubts when the group would really chip away at development. This implied the group needed to hold up until the point that the lead was accessible to make the best essential stride, and this further caused issues in meeting due dates.
Shortchanged quality Assurance
Numerous unidentified dangers and poor management of the suggested important time lost in adapting to these obstacles, inferring approaching due dates. With a specific end goal to urgently meet due dates, quality wasn't precisely neglected, however quality rules weren't entirely clung to and code surveys weren't directed on a minute level. This prompted bargains on quality and expectations being sent back for audit and rebuilding. As there were stringent courses of events, the quality confirmation and testing after the customer was setup was not done to a full degree. This on occasion prompted migration of data failures when the customers needed to access the customer management system. This exhausted the trust in the group and influenced the association with the customer.
Overestimated Savings from New Tools or Methods
The customer side development exertion was thought little of as it was expected that just wrappers needs to be built over the current CRM system on Salesforce. The new necessity was to recover enormous data from the Pega CRM system in one request whereas the current Salesforce CRM system could just recover a single data index in a one request. It was chosen that a wrapper would be created to expend this current CRM the required number of times, however demonstrated lamentable when solicitations to the wrapper coordinated out because of long reaction times. This implied new CRM considering various data indexes should have been developed from the beginning for all functionalities causing exceptionally disillusioning due date misses. The group's absence of information in the customer side programming of the project just added to the troubles.
Abandonment of planning under pressure
As the project was commenced with unclear details and statement of work, it so happened that the project needed to commence without proper planning. Over the span of the project the customer continued requesting relocation of employees which was not in the underlying contract. At first, they requested to send 3 employees to their London office for training. This was not part of the Statement of work and subsequently was not planned. This prompted financial constraints and asset crunch and a greater amount of all pressure and vulnerability. Following a span of fourteen days they again requested to migrate a couple of employees to Chennai, India office. This was for all intents and purposes being hard to keep up to irregular transfers that were requested by the customer. Additionally, such sudden and eccentric movement demands created lot of issues in the group and furthermore created financial trouble.
Conclusion
This project is an example of how improper planning and poor management controls can lead to lot of issues in the project. Effective communication and co-ordination are key factors in project management. We should recall that project management is not a straight-line process, however an iterative procedure that requires quick rethinking as the known condition changes before your eyes.
