Signature Inc. Company

In reviewing the Signature Inc. Company and its current state, I would begin as the new project manager by familiarizing myself with as much detail as possible in regards to why the current methodologies are failing.

I would do a thorough assessment of the situation and use data to determine why the current strategic plan is not successful. One of the main reasons noted is the use of the waterfall methodology. This methodology does not allow one to go back and address specific areas of a project. This methodology is based on completing a portion of a project to perfection and then moving on. It does not allows for the fluidity to go back and forth and therefore if a project is not on the appropriate trajectory, mid course corrections and adjustments cannot be made to improve the function of the program. The problem is that the waterfall model is set up in such a fashion that all requirements are specified in advance. When a change is needed (and often it is), it cannot take place.

The next area that I noted was that the testing phase was not addressed which did not allow for any data to base the projected outcome of the project. The final piece that added to the failure was the oversight of the project manager to update the analysis phase.

In taking over the project, I would begin by assessing the situation as I explained above. I would develop a plan and the take time to prepare the team for a recovery phase of the project. During this time, I would re-assess the methodology that was previously used and apply a newer methodology and ensure that the testing phase was done.

I would recommend the extreme programming methodology. For this particular project, I feel that this program would be best suited because this method is broken up into four phases. This method allows you to go back to a certain phase as needed as opposed to the waterfall method which did not allow for this to account for changes.

In addition, there is continuous feedback from users. This ensures that there is no communication gap between customer s and the project team. I feel that this communication is vital. The test requirements are also generated prior to a code being developed. This will ensure that no phase is ever skipped allowing for a "hole" in the procedure. Lastly, I chose this method as a part of the recovery as it saves time and it allows for a constant adjustment when needed. Additionally, this method allows for the larger project to be broken down into smaller chunks. In this fashion, there can be several milestones noted and success can be noted for each milestone of the project. This not only allows for a boost in moral of those associated with the project, but it also allows for a more manageable project.

In summary, I believe that these applications would move this project back on the path of the much needed recovery so that success can be the final outcome. It is critical to ensure that all components