The Titanic: A Failed Project Management

The sinking of the Titanic took only 2 hours and 40 minutes. The failure of this project can be traced back to a series of project management-related issues. This paper will delve into the what, why, and how of the disaster from a project management standpoint. Understanding the project dynamics that resulted in the liner sinking should provide one with lessons relating on the importance of meticulousness where project management is concerned. This paper provides a project manager’s perspective of the different factors that caused the sinking of the ship. Therefore, understanding the different perspectives from a project management viewpoint provides one with an opportunity to derive appropriate lessons.

Background and Context for Project

RMS Titanic, a British liner that sank on the 14th of April of 1912, was plagued by several project management blunders that can only be identified by looking back at a series of decisions made. A project management perspective paints the Titanic story as having several issues with the design process. It can also be observed that the construction process lacked some essentials. A competent project manager can also determine that the testing phase for the project was wanting. Another issue that affected the ship's effectiveness in the long term was the ship’s integrity.

The Titanic was owned by three individuals: Lord Pirre and Bruce Ismay. Another stakeholder was JP Morgan who was the financier to the project. According to research, the three stakeholders would work together to develop a strategy that would give them a competitive edge. Some of the other companies working the Southampton New York route had taken up a fast route strategy. According to the records observed for the purposes of this research, the major rival to White Ship Stars (Titanics Builder) was Cunard, a company whose strategy was to build fast ships. On the other hand, the RMS Titanic was built to be a luxurious liner.

Discussion of Factors Contributing to Failures

The major factor that contributed towards the failure of this project was a conflict of priorities between the stakeholders. Varying priorities between the stakeholders resulted in scope creep which in turn resulted in failure of the project. The project status model below details the levels of cope creep for this project.

Another factor that can be related with this project was the application of flawed lessons from the collision of the Olympics. The lessons learned from that incident ended up making the Titanic susceptible to accidents. Additionally, the Titanic project had issues to do with the crow nest lacking appropriate tools as well as poor communication between relevant personnel. Poor communication between the crew has been found to influence the types of decisions made in managing the ship. One finds that the liner should have been designed and implemented with the communication identified and implemented well.

The project could have benefited from proper interaction with the stakeholders. The project controllers lacked the appropriate knowledge of the individuals who influenced the trajectory of the project. One can also observe that the project lacked an appropriate central mechanism for control. Minimized centralization also eliminated effective communication between the groups that would help in improving the final product. It is also evident that the ship lacked an effective fallback plan in case failure was encountered. The only way such information could have been availed to the project managers would have been through the testing process.

Analysis of Factors Contributing to Failures

The stakeholder issue was a key contributing factor to the Titanic’s collision with an iceberg. The project managers did not know who the stakeholder whose opinion mattered the most. It is therefore evident that the teams involved lacked the foresight and leadership needed in designing a finished product that would satisfy the needs of all stakeholders. For example, the lessons from the collision of the Olympics were flawed by the opinions of the different stakeholders. One can observe that certain stakeholders preferred an increase in the number of lifeboats would be on the liner. However, this preference had a direct effect on the design of the ship, which contributed to its collision with the iceberg.

The RMS Titanic lacked some very important tools; for instance, the crow nest lacked binoculars that would aid in the navigation of the shit. However, it is also evident that the poor communication between the wireless operators and the captain rendered the ship doomed. The aforementioned problems can be traced back to the testing phase for the ship. Following an addition of modifications, the RMS Titanic was not tested to identify whether the ship was going to be effective when transporting clients. The crew were not well versed with the ship and had not been tested for stressful situations. It is therefore evident that the ship and its crew were bound to encounter major problems while on transit.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the project lacked strong leadership that would see to it that a systemic approach is implemented. Majority of the project goals and ideals were implemented without taking key issues into consideration. Additionally, it is evident that the project lacked structure in the management of the different elements that contributed towards the final product. The Titanic could have avoided the sinking situation if the project was managed well.