Scheduling Tool Management Strategies, Research Paper Example

This is a project straight outta Dilbert. My new department manager, who seems to lack a technical background, has charged me with buying an online scheduling tool, and has given me the budget and responsibility for also buying and configuring our own server to run the program on. I’m also supposed to hire the technical staff to install the scheduling software, and hire others to train the student Project Managers (PMs) in the use of the program. That’s the assignment as he presented it to me. He doesn’t seem to know that scheduling packages powerful enough for governmental and corporate use are available right out of the box with a minimum of licensing and contractual fuss, and that anyone with any kind of desktop /laptop experience can quickly learn to use them. In fact, the entire industry is quickly moving to cloud computing, where (in the words of one such vendor) “you don’t have to pay for software, servers or IT support to enjoy the simplicity of cutting-edge medical scheduling.” So I’m all dressed up with nowhere to go.

The problem is that tomorrow afternoon I have a meeting with this manager, and if I don’t convince him of the soundness of my approach, I will be demoted, or possibly terminated. So I’m going to present the mandatory tasks originally given to me as needlessly more expensive alternatives to the cheaper and much more direct retail route. What my supervisor appears to be unclear about is the distinction between proprietary software and commercially available software. While the former can often require the installation of new servers plus the hiring of a training team, the latter kind does not. In fact, in the future it probably will not even be necessary to buy professional-level scheduling software. Instead, it will be free and open-sourced (although installation vendors may still be required for really big projects).  So I will need to convince my supervisor of the practicality of not going with a proprietary system like the old one that we are abandoning. Here my overwhelming advantage is cost. Getting the software out of the box would require no additional server or IT specialists or specially hired trainers. Instead, the software installs itself and there is an abundance of online help, both within the company’s website and throughout the Web generally. It’s a no-brainer — which should suit my supervisor just fine.

The do-it-yourself approach as it was assigned to me brings with it the problem of multiple contracts, while buying a conventional commercial program comes only with the standard user- and licensing-agreement. Hiring technicians to install and configure the software will not have the same contract as hiring a training entity to teach the student PMs in the program’s use. And buying a new server will require still another contract.

There are six primary contract-forms I have to choose from, each with its own advantages and disadvantages. They are as follows: firm fixed price, fixed price with targets, fixed price at cost, time and materials, cost sharing, and cost plus a fixed fee. I plan to use three of them: firm fixed price, time and materials, and cost plus a fixed fee.  The problem is that each stage of the installation, regardless of what kind of contract I have, can be held hostage by any of the others due to delays or unsatisfactory performance. So if I buy a low-risk contract for one service, the lack of performance by another contractor may result in an unexpected high-risk or higher-cost situation on the low-risk contract, with us paying the penalty in higher added costs or uncompensated delays. So it is important to take enough time at each consecutive stage before contracting for the next one. This runs the risk of causing problems for our next project’s launch date. If necessary I’ll argue for a shorter delay in going live in order to minimize long-term risk.

First, I would need to buy the server and its housing, and install its basic system-software to run it and support the scheduling program. For that, I would go with the time and materials contract. Ordinarily, this would be seen as a blank check to the contractor. However, I would insist on negotiating the labor rate, maximum number of labor hours, mark-up on materials, and include a not-to-exceed-total clause. This contract is not a difficult selection, because it is the only phase of the installation that even uses materials, namely the server, its housing, and connective wiring. The rest of this project is a matter of buying software (which may not even involve buying installation CDs, being downloadable from the vendor instead), and hiring training and expertise. The only barriers to a time-and-materials contract would be any reluctance on the part of the contractor to my negotiated points. Bu in this business climate, I feel confident of implementing this strategy successfully, which is to hold the contractor to strict limits while allowing reasonable materials cost. If possible, included in the contract would be the final stage of the installation, which would be the removal and disposal of the old proprietary scheduling-software and hardware that are no longer to be used after the new software goes live. (I won’t mention to my manager that this phase will actually be part of a general reduction in on-site server capacity when we move more of our programs to a cloud-computing format.)

Second, I would need to hire the technicians to install and configure the scheduling software on the new server. For this, I would use the firm fixed price contract. That is because installation should be easy, since the software vendor would be fully informed beforehand what the new server and its capacities are. (The vendor would learn this while gather information for an estimate.) I would gather bids from a variety of scheduling-software vendors. The equipment (server) installer would be encouraged to bid as well, as they will have also installed the server-software, and would have even greater familiarity with the situation. It is my expectation that they would offer the lowest bid for this phase of the installation. The choice for a firm fixed price contract was not difficult, and I would expect no particular problems with getting a good bid.

Third, I would need to hire a training team to teach the student PMs how to use the new scheduling program. This could very probably be done by the provider of the scheduling-software itself. For such a service, I would insist that it be handled under another firm fixed price contract. I would accept only the lowest bid from that vendor, as it is my belief that my staff would basically have to learn the proprietary system themselves anyway. In other words, no such training contracted for would be worth a premium price. However, if the successful bidder were from a separate company, I would only accept bids only for a cost plus a fixed fee contract. This would lower the cost to us while theoretically raising our responsibility level in the future. But I am resigned to the fact that such training is a dog and pony show and not at all comprehensive. It would be for familiarization only, and up to my staff to master on their own.

Fourth, I must make sure that the experienced experts are available (online, not on-site) for the first 60 days after the scheduler goes live. As discussed above, I expect that my people would have to learn and master the proprietary program themselves, so I view this as a minimal service to be provided, and I wouldn’t intend to pay more than the minimum. For this I would again offer only a take-it-or-leave it cost plus a fixed fee, which allows the contractor to add a fee for profit, a profit that, again, will have no need to get any bigger at our end.

Finally, I definitely need to arrange for the removal and disposal of the old server that ran our old proprietary scheduling system. I noted this earlier. This will be a simple matter no matter who does it: just unplug the server, remove it and its housing, and destroy the hard disks. I would attempt to include this service in the contract for the installation of any new server. In short, I would expect to pay essentially nothing, it being a kind of tax that the installing contractor will have to pay in order to get our business in the first place. Should this fail, I would then solicit bids based on firm fixed price contract. Since I expect further hardware reductions anyway and would let the contractor know it, he would likely be willing to eat any unexpected added costs in the hopes of getting another contract for the repeat business down the road.