The Ford Hybrid SUV project case depicts three distinctive stages of the project life cycle:
Stage 3: Project Development; this stage is clearly shown in the way the head of product development realized that the scientist within the group were concentrating on improving different aspects of the project, something that was taking too long.
Stage 4: Project Implementation; this stage is clearly depicted in the manner in which the arrival of the new project team member instigates movement from product development in project execution. Soon the project’s components were falling into place and the vehicle’s performance was being testes.
Stage 5: Project Closure. This entailed the unveiling of the hybrid SUV despite the fact that some parts of the project were not up to the standards of the liking of some of the scientists like Sankaran who wished to mitigate and of possible eliminate the engine noise.
By having two project managers for the same project, Phil Martens made a good choice that finally paid off. This is because, while Prabhaker Patil concentrated on the research and development of the Hybrid SUV itself, MaryAnn Wright concentrated on launching the product with a marketing and managerial perspective. This created a balance in expertise.
The risks associated with such a high visibility high risk project is the possibility that the product may not be readily accepted in the market, or if it is, its market is considerably small. This risk stands to claim a project as a failure despite its uniqueness.
I would not have liked to be a member of this team. This is because the team is research oriented and does not have diversity. The majority of the team members seek to build the perfect car without considering the marketing implications.