Search results

After completion of the case study, the participants will be able to understand the significance of quality as a pivotal domain within project management and to analyze the issues related to quality and offer logical solutions.

In this case, the Bharat Bijlee Construction Limited (BBCL) group, with a proven track record of over five decades in the transmission and distribution business in India, decided to venture into international projects, considering the prevailing stagnant domestic power sector. They secured contracts worth $85m from the “Shariket Karhaba Koudiet Eddraouch Spa,” a state-owned company responsible for power generation, transmission and distribution in Algeria. However, during the execution phase of these projects, BBCL encountered significant challenges related to product and service quality. These challenges arose due to the tight schedule constraints and cost considerations, as well as a lack of understanding of the dynamics involved in executing international projects, especially in the demanding conditions of the sub-Saharan desert. This case study addresses the complex issue of ensuring and maintaining high-quality standards in large-scale substation projects situated in the challenging environment of the sub-Saharan desert, highlighting the importance of effective project management and international project execution expertise. The case study is from quality management knowledge area and focuses on identification of root cause of quality noncompliance and for better decision-making in projects.

The teaching case is designed for undergraduate and postgraduate courses in project management, civil engineering and architecture domain. The participants will be able to understand the application of various quality tools, statistical process tools and control charts in problem identification, categorization, root cause identification and decision-making.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS2: Built environment

Project Management, Entrepreneurship, Risk Management, Communication.

Study level: MBA and Executive Education.

Applicability: This case can be taught in the project management course. It will cover the project-planning phase, which is an iterative or progressive elaboration for the entire project lifecycle. The case will help in discussing how project management is an important discipline to manage projects and stakeholders effectively.

The case depicts the dilemma of a passionate entrepreneur who is setting up an ambitious dairy business but project execution goes awry. The case discusses the challenges related to project planning and execution.

It captures the essence of proactive risk management, measures that can mitigate risks and create opportunities. The case also discusses the entire project lifecycle from project initiation to closure and the challenges a manager has to face in terms of stakeholder engagement, risk management, stakeholder communication and scope change.

To understand the alignment of the project with the organisation strategy; to learn to create a project plan and monitor and control the scope, schedule, resources and costs; to accurately estimate project costs, timelines, and quality and schedule, using tools like MS Project; to learn the risk management techniques for managing projects, teams and stakeholders; and to manage stakeholder communication effectively.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 2: Built Environment.

After reading the case and answering the case assignments, students will be able to understand and explain the challenges and opportunities for engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) contractors and their subcontractors; understand and critically analyse the advantages and disadvantages of insourcing and outsourcing of engineering, procurement and construction in EPC projects; determine which situations merit insourcing or outsourcing within each of engineering, procurement and construction in EPC projects; understand and identify the competencies and qualifications that a subcontractor must possess if any EPC activity is outsourced to them; and develop a decision-making framework to determine which EPC activities must be kept in-house or outsourced in EPC projects.

In mid-March 2021, PetroSahand International Group, a leading EPC contractor specializing in the oil, gas and petrochemicals industries in Iran, encountered significant challenges with its subcontractors in engineering and construction. These issues resulted in widespread repercussions for the company, including project delays and mounting debts. At the peak of these crises, PetroSahand’s senior management embarked on a thorough examination of whether to insource or outsource various aspects of their operations, such as engineering, procurement and construction. Their objective was twofold: to prevent similar setbacks in future projects and to navigate existing projects with minimal disruption to the company’s reputation. To address this critical dilemma, PetroSahand enlisted the expertise of a consulting team from Sharif University of Technology. Comprising esteemed professors, graduates and students from one of Iran’s most respected institutions, this team undertook an exhaustive analysis of the insourcing versus outsourcing debate across EPC domains. Subsequently, they presented their comprehensive findings, thereby confronting PetroSahand’s senior management with a pivotal choice regarding the optimal approach for each activity.

The audience of this work is undergraduate and graduate students who are enrolled in project management courses, both fundamentals and advanced. In addition, this case helps senior managers of EPC contractors gain a deeper and more comprehensive understanding of insourcing or outsourcing different project activities.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 7: Management science.

The key teaching objectives of the case are the following:▪ to develop an awareness of a megaproject’s external environment (through PESTLE) in terms of challenges from each source;▪ to introduce theory that allows students to identify, characterise and describe factors that can lead to inter-organisational conflict during construction projects;▪ to develop the ability to apply the typology of causal factors (identified in Objective 2) to a given context, answering why each factor may have contributed to the given contractual dispute;▪ to develop an understanding of the procurement and contract management process wherein contracts are not only the logical outcome of the procurement process but also the primary vehicles for clarifying responsibilities (for task completion) and risk transfer; and▪ to understand specific dynamics of construction projects that make disputes inevitable and ways to overcome these.

Priced at US$1.63bn (in 2015), the Orange Line Metro Train (OLMT) project in Lahore was one of Pakistan’s earliest (and costliest!) transport infrastructure megaprojects ever undertaken. Devised to ease congestion in Lahore, promote ecofriendly, efficient, modern and affordable transport systems and lead to improved mobility across Lahore, the OLMT was a socially, politically and economically important project.The case is seen through the eyes of the protagonist, Uzair Shah, a seasoned public servant and an experienced Transport Engineer. At the time of the decision, Shah was General Manager – Operations at the newly established Punjab Metrobus Authority (PMA – the project sponsor) and was also the project lead of OLMT’s Project Management Unit (PMU). Through Shah’s eyes, students approach the project at a juncture when the most serious contractual dispute in the project’s history has erupted. The parties at the interface were Lahore Development Authority (LDA), PMU’s technical interface with contractors and consultants and Maqbool-Colson Joint Venture (MCJV), one of the two civil work contractors hired for OLMT’s civil works.While quality issues had been emerging with MCJV for a few months, LDA had maintained unilateral communications and remained considerably adversarial in their dealings with MCJV. Eventually, in October 2016, this relationship had soured to such an extent that it appeared irreconcilable. It was only then that LDA had recommended Shah to take the contractor to court for non-performance.The decision that Uzair faced was whether to take LDA’s advice and take the contractor to court (terminate the contract, claim performance guarantee and appoint a new contractor) or negotiate and continue with the current contract. The decision had huge financial, legal, reputational, political and schedule-related implications. The decision needed to be taken by the protagonist in the context of all these factors.

The case was initially developed for use within a Procurement and Contracts Management course for a (business) executive audience. The case is intended for the business school audience or students enrolled in courses related to the construction management discipline.Courses where the case can be used include Construction Project Management, Public Sector Projects, Contracts and Procurement and Strategic Projects and Practice (or similar). The case can also be used within an MBA setting.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS: 9: Operations and Logistics.

After completion of the case study, the students will be able to understand the importance of being culturally savvy when working in a culturally diverse environment and managing people from different cultures; critically reflect on the risks resulting from the absence of a clear direction from the company’s top management regarding unifying corporate values and a diversity policy for cooperation across cultures; be aware of best practices in implementing diversity management (DM) initiatives in the company; and learn that changes in the strategic orientation (i.e. focus on automation projects) must be cascaded down to hard elements of structures, processes and systems, as well as to soft elements of skills, staff and management style.

The Kuwaiti branch of a Japanese corporation specialising in control systems and instruments, Rising Sun IT, hired a German professional, Alex, to handle the increasing demand for automation from customers. This recruitment followed several unsuccessful attempts by the company to deliver more advanced automation solutions. Recognising the need to adapt to Kuwaiti customer requirements or risk losing market share, Japanese management understood the importance of transforming their engineering staff. Failure to achieve this next automation step would result in a steady decline in market share and ultimately impact the company’s survival. However, Alex, who was supposed to lead automation projects, was confronted with opposition from the Indian engineering staff and managers. He was not able to find common ground with the staff and perceived issues such as lack of communication, delays in work schedules, missed deadlines and high levels of absenteeism, as a sign of low work morale. Although he tried to increase the awareness of his supervisor and other managers by informing them repeatedly about the problems regarding employee behaviours, his interventions went unheard. He felt ousted by his fellow colleagues and the other employees. Besides, from Alex’s point of view, the Japanese top management did not provide clear directions to the staff and explicit support to Alex in his efforts. This case study highlights three dimensions of Alex’s problem with establishing and maintaining working relationships with other people in the company:▪ Alex’s cultural “blindness” and ignorance of differences in work behaviours that ultimately led to his inability to build solid and trustful relationships with other employees. The case study demonstrates Germany’s performance-oriented and individual-centric culture versus India’s family- and community-oriented culture and the Japanese employees’ strongly hierarchical and company loyalty-oriented culture.▪ Lack of support from the Japanese top management to Alex, which is connected with a wider problem of the lack of a systematic strategic approach to managing a culturally diverse workforce. The case study pinpoints the rhetoric–reality gap in DM in the company, where the diversity, equity and inclusion programme and corporate values were applied only formally and had little attention from the leaders as well as non-managerial employees.▪ Employee resistance to change: The lack of positive communication from the top management level in the company regarding automation projects and the lack of support for Alex’s mission in the company resulted in steady resistance to executing projects, which endangered the company’s survival in the market. Also, one part of Alex’s problem with building a working relationship with the Indian engineering staff was based on the fact that others perceived him as the automation “change agent” – an advocate and catalyst of an undesirable change connected with adverse consequences on employment in the Indian community.

This case is intended for discussion in undergraduate management and business study programmes.

Teaching notes are available for educators only.

CSS 6: Human resource management.

This case deals with several types of uncertainties faced by project team in an oil company north east in India. These challenges and uncertainties are in the areas drawing approval, supply chain, critical equipment availability, soll type, control room, soil type, employee availability, environmental clearances, safety and wildlife clearances. This project demonstrates the ownership issues, why it is difficult to complete a project on time in the Northeast of India or why public sector project gets delayed.

GMR Infrastructure Limited (GMRIL) had to make a decision on its continued role in the 555.48 km Kishangarh Udaipur Ahmedabad (KUA) Expressway Project, India's then longest road public-private partnership (PPP) project. GMR had terminated the contract citing NHAI's failure in fulfilling Conditions Precedent (CP) of providing (i) environment clearance (EC), (ii) revised toll free notification and (iii) 80% of required land. The case intends to educate the reader on the concessionaire-authority dynamics in typical Indian infrastructure PPPs. Taking into account its internal strategy, the extant unfavourable investment climate, the Central Government's steps to revive private interest in the highways sector and NHAI's quick turnaround in fulfilling CP, GMR had to decide how to respond.

This case deals with steps taken by NTPC in construction and project management in 500 MW power plant. The project have several innovative ways of managing challenges, in land acquisition, design, implementation, contract worker management, enforcement of safety rules, managing regulation iand in team building in leadership. A suitable case for site management, it shows in spite of being a public sector undertaking, how the project was constructed in record time of 42 months.

Organizational behavior, leadership, strategic management.

This case can be used at Master's level management students as well as for executive education programmes. The case can be used to teach courses like organizational behavior, leadership and strategic management.

Mumbai Rail Vikas Corporation (MRVC) had been established with a purpose of catering the rail transportation requirement of Mumbai, the economic capital of India. After its establishment in the year 1999, commuters were hopeful but very less development and improvement was reported for six years. Mr P.C. Sehgal took over as Managing Director of MRVC in the year 2005. The primary task of Mr P.C. Sehgal was to implement the rail development plan proposed by Mumbai Urban Transport Project within the deadlines. Implementation of the given plan had various challenges and required high degree of coordination with different stakeholders (like Government of Maharashtra, Central Railway, Western Railway, etc.). It also required taking important decisions to move work fast and dealing with media and public pressure.

The case would instigate students to delve on the aspects of leadership and how the leader brings about change. The students would also get to know the challenges a leader face when he takes charge of an underperforming but critically important organization. Further the students are also exposed to the context of organizational management where the organization is trapped in a web of relations with conflicting stakeholders.

Teaching note.

General Management/Strategy.

Post-graduate/MBA.

Case A: Mr Grandhi Mallikarjuna Rao, founding chairman of GMR, was considering a proposal to bid for an upcoming international airport in Hyderabad, India. The strategic move would have marked GMR’s foray into the Indian airport infrastructure sector. GMR had been involved in the development and operation of power plants and had thrived on public–private partnerships for all its projects. Mr Rao is thinking: Should GMR make another major investment in infrastructure development by bidding to build the airport in Hyderabad, India? Further, how should the organization prepare itself for this strategic move? Case B: On April 4, 2013, the meeting of GMR’s Group Executive Council (GEC) was scheduled to take place. Srinivivas Bommidala, G.M. Rao’s son-in-law and Chairman of GMR’s airports business, was gearing up for the meeting. The meeting was called to discuss a proposal for bidding for an upcoming airport project in the Philippines. It had been more than a decade since GMR entered the airport infrastructure sector. The organization had built substantial airport operating expertise during that period. It adopted a joint venture (JV) model for expanding in the airport infrastructure business. Until now, the organization had always formed JVs for all its airport projects. JVs with existing airport operators were necessitated by the bid conditions that required a certain minimum airport operating experience for qualifying as a bidder for various projects. In some cases, a JV with a local player helped GMR with market knowledge for functioning in a foreign market. GMR also used JVs to access the capabilities it lacked for operating in this sector and gradually learnt from its partners for building capabilities in-house. The group now had the required operating expertise in the sector to qualify as a bidder. One of the key issues the GEC was contemplating was: Whether GMR should continue to form JV for bidding for the upcoming project or should it go solo? Further, if it had to form a JV then, in which areas should it seek a partner?

Case A: To understand the relationship between key concepts in strategic management, including diversification, capabilities and core competence. To help students understand the various factors managers consider when deciding on the diversification strategy of an organization. To create an understanding of the organizational processes required to facilitate diversification into a new segment. To teach students how to evaluate a potential market opportunity that may require a firm to take on a diversification strategy. Case B: To help students understand how companies use alliances as growth strategies. To understand the rationale for formation of various alliances. To explore various factors managers consider when deciding on alliance strategy of an organization. To understand the challenges associated with using alliances as a strategic option. To understand the pros and cons of internal development (i.e. going solo) vis-à-vis strategic alliances.

CSS 11: Strategy.