Please answer in one paragraph each question. Mastering Scope and Requirements ManagementStudy IIRadia EngineeringCaseRadia Engineering is an organization of approximately 5,000 employees, specializing in aftermarket productdevelopment for the automotive industry. One year ago, Radia created a Project Management Officeto coordinate the development of project management expertise. Because Radia's product developmentspanned four countries, they were particularly interested in bringing consistency to their project managementpractices.As one of their first decisions, the PMO mandated that all product development projects be formallychartered, develop a scope statement, and create a work breakdown structure as part of project planning.To encourage thorough planning, the PMO mandated that the planning phase should be completed beforesubsequent design, development, or construction phases could begin. Tools and document templates fromprevious successful projects were provided to help facilitate these practices across the company, anddocumentation from projects was periodically audited and reviewed by the PMO for compliance.After six months of collecting project documentation, the PMO observed a trend. Most of the projectswere making an attempt to create a WBS, but the results were typically incomplete and inconsistent. Justas troubling, the resulting WBS was not being used by the project team after its initial creation.For several months, tension increased between the PMO and the project managers in the field over thisissue. The PMO then determined that the best way to resolve the situation was to spend time with theproject managers, auditing the performance of their planning activities. Representatives from the PMOdecided to observe a new project, led by John Gates, a mid-level project manager at Radia.After the new project was initiated, the project team, under the direction of Gates, completed a pass at thehigh-level scope statement and then met to create the work breakdown structure. The team took the maindeliverable for this project (in this case, an aftermarket-integrated automotive GPS navigation system),beginning at the top level, and decomposed the work down as far as they could. After two days of work, theteam began to argue about the scope of the project and the tasks needed to build the product. Severaliterations of the WBS were attempted before the team finally abandoned the effort and input the data directlyinto their scheduling software (in this case, Microsoft Project).During this process, a general sentiment emerged among the team that the WBS was a somewhat antiquatedtechnique that had not kept up with developments in project management software.After this, Radia's PMO was split on whether or not the WBS should be mandated on all product developmentprojects. Furthermore, if the work breakdown structures were crucial on all projects, the PMO was unsure howto help Radia's project managers and teams create the WBS in a way that contributed to the overall success ofthe project instead of being an academic exercise that frustrated the project team. Mastering Scope and Requirements ManagementCase Study IIl QuestionsRadia Engineering:1. What underlying problems caused Radia's project managers diffiulty in creating the WBS?2. Is the team's feeling that the WBS is an old-fashioned concept with or without merit?3. What problems might the team experience as a result of their approach?4. Would it be valuable for the team to make the work breakdown structure after the project schedule has beencreated in Microsoft Project?5. Was it a good idea for Radia's PMO to mandate a work breakdown structure for all product developmentprojects?

Question

Accepted Answer

Summary-
Radia Engineering is an association of around 5,000 representatives, gaining practical…