Case Study Analysis: New Royal Adelaide Hospital Project

Part A: Group activity on integrated infrastructure project management

To develop the infrastructure in the current situation the public-private partnership is one of the most efficient way (Roe & Mell, 2013). In this partnership, private organizations always look for some profitable method which will also be budget friendly for them. This type of methods is ideal for the implementation of the public-private partnership project arrangement (FASO, 2016). This type of public-private partnership projects has the main focus on the economic goals and the financial targets of the project. The selected project for this case is the New Royal Adelaide Hospital project. By the construction of New Royal Adelaide Hospital, it is actually replacing the Old Royal Adelaide Hospital and building new infrastructure for the healthcare system.

As this project is a construction based project, to complete the project successfully main demands of this project is funding, stakeholders, project manager and a proper project management plan for the project execution. The funding is the basic thing for every normal project. It is not possible to execute any projects without any type of funding. So funding is a basic demand for the project. Stakeholders are another basic demand for the project. Without the stakeholders, it is not possible to start any project as no one will be involved with the project (Eskerod & Jepsen, 2016). Also, a proper project plan and the project manager is required for driving the project in the right way.

In many cases, a project has been failed because of the stakeholder issue. In this cases, the stakeholders show lack of interest to actively participate in a project (Scheer et al., 2014). Thus because of the communication issues and for many other issues the whole project fails. Strategic value means when the customer is able to extract greater value from the process of the acquisition. In this case, the customer is able to generate higher profits than the acquired business. In this selected case study of the New Royal Adelaide Hospital, the strategic value is not provided or generated because the project failed to deliver its promises in the given amount of time. Thus the cost of the project increased, and the project failed to provide the strategic values. Most of the stakeholders of the project want profit from the actual project, and other stakeholders demand perfect service from the project. In this case, the project of the New Royal Adelaide Hospital failed to meet the expectations of both the stakeholders.

Part B: Selection of a large-scale infrastructure project involving public-private partnership

As the project of the New Royal Adelaide Hospital is based on the public-private partnership, initially this project has a very much positive impact on the society. This is because it provides job opportunity for society in the initial stages (Amankwaa & Anku-Tsede, 2015). With that government also benefits from this type of contracts. The government may be aware of their inadequacy about performing a project. In such cases, the government takes help from the private organizations to successfully execute the project which is implemented in this case to complete the project faster. This will help to provide the projected service faster to the society. Thus it should have a positive impact on the society but ultimately the project failed to complete in the given deadline, and the positive impact of the project is decreased.

Nothing was done by the project leadership to address the negative impacts of the project which was missing the deadline of completion of the project. After missing the first deadline, the project leader could have been taken some extra initiative to complete the task in the given deadline, but nothing was done at that time to bring the project right back at the track. Only some legal steps are taken from both of the ends which were totally ineffective.

The project of the New Royal Adelaide Hospital was having all the factors of the triple bottom line involved in the project. All of these factors were overlooked in the stage of the project planning. In the case of the economic factor it was assessed that the project would cost around $1.7bn which was fine. Later this cost raised to $2.3bn which was carrying a huge negative factor on the economy of the Australian government. In the case of the social impacts, this project was carrying a good impact as this project was created multiple types of jobs in the society (Elkington, 2013). In the case of the environmental factor, this project consumed a lot of lands, but it is negligible because the land was already occupied by a rail yard. For this project, the social impacts and the environmental impacts were assessed at the project planning stage.

The worst side of the project was that it was not completed in the given time period. To complete the project in a given deadline critical path can be determined. Critical path helps to determine the shortest way to do a project which was missing in the project initially (Meher & Park, 2014). Also, with that, a high-performance team could have been hired to improve the execution process of the project of the New Royal Adelaide Hospital. At the time of the execution, the project was executed as a whole. This cloud has been divided into some parts and can be executed in parallel which can increase the rate of the project execution efficiency.

From the failure of the project of the New Royal Adelaide Hospital, some lesson about the project leadership is learned. This lessons can help to improve the project execution. From the project, it is learned that a better relationship is required to execute the project successfully. The relationship between the government and private organization was not up to the mark and for that the project failed. Also, the effective meetings by the project leader help to improve the efficiency of the project which was missing in this case (Barling, 2014). These meetings can clear doubts about the project members. Project visualization is very much important for every project. The leader of the project failed to visualize the future of the project. So, the lesson of the project visualization is learned in this case.

References:

Amankwaa, A., & Anku-Tsede, O. (2015). Linking transformational leadership to employee turnover: The moderating role of alternative job opportunity. International Journal of Business Administration, 6(4), 19.

Barling, J. (2014). The science of leadership: Lessons from research for organizational leaders. Oxford University Press, USA.

Elkington, J. (2013). Enter the triple bottom line. In The triple bottom line (pp. 23-38). Routledge.

Eskerod, P., & Jepsen, A. L. (2016). Project stakeholder management. Routledge.

FASO, I. B. (2016). Public Private Partnership.

Meher, P. K., & Park, S. Y. (2014). Critical-path analysis and low-complexity implementation of the LMS adaptive algorithm. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems I: Regular Papers, 61(3), 778-788.

Roe, M., & Mell, I. (2013). Negotiating value and priorities: evaluating the demands of green infrastructure development. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 56(5), 650-673.

Scheer, D., Benighaus, C., Benighaus, L., Renn, O., Gold, S., Röder, B., & Böl, G. F. (2014). The distinction between risk and hazard: understanding and use in stakeholder communication. Risk Analysis, 34(7), 1270-1285.