Rogue Division Project MGS 4000 Mrs. Liggett de Jong Purple

8/14/2019 Rogue Division Project MGS 4000 Mrs. Liggett de Jong Purple

1/12

Rogue Division Project

MGS 4000

Mrs. Liggett De Jong

Purple Group


2/12

Table of Contents

1. Project Memo

2. Nominal Group Technique

3. Consequence Matrix

4. Delphi Scoring Matrix

5. Risk Profile

6. Risk Tolerance/Desirability Matrix

Comment [jld1]: Table of Cois a nice touch.


3/12

Memo

Problem Statement: How should North Central Power Company respond to thesituation brought about by Mrs. Gilby & Mr. Adams allegations?

List of initial objectives:Maintain morale

Minimize financial lossPreserve public imageMaintain positive public relationsMinimize effects to established business relationshipsMaintain credibility / reputationMinimize company improprietiesPreserve integrity (corp. and employees)Ensure that the truth outweighs the allegationsDemonstrate plaintiffs were acting out of character of companys managementMaintain companys best interestMaintain customer relationsPreserve relevant valid evidenceMinimize negative press

Reduce loss of customersEdit company policiesDo not admit guiltEducate employeesAvoid long drawn out court proceedingsReduce loss

Must and want criteria:When we evaluated the list of ranked objectives we only considered those withthe lowest scores. As a result we missed some that were of little importancebecause of our narrow focus of only low scoring objectives. We did not attempt tocombine objectives that were similar, maintaining an argument that they weredifferent, even if the difference was minimal. It was our understanding that the

musts and wants matrices would eliminate unnecessary objectives andalternatives and that we should not trim them down before we applied saidprocess.

We learned after compiling our initial list of objectives that none of them werequantifiable and therefore could not be considered must criteria. We alsoeliminated the objectives ensure that the truth outweighs the allegations,demonstrate plaintiffs were acting out of character of companys management,do not admit guilt, and avoid long drawn out court proceedings. This was donebecause they were actually alternatives rather than objectives. The remainingobjectives as listed in the first Delphi table 3Purple1.xls were our want criteria.

Comment [jld2]: Do not fullyunderstand this comment. Whyou evaluating your list of objecfor?

Comment [jld3]: Must criterialimited to just quantifiable objec


4/12

Our individual initial lists of alternatives were compiled and trimmed down into the16 shown in our Delphi table. After our submissions and revisions we narrowedour objectives down to:

Maintain morale

Minimize financial loss

Maintain positive public relations

Maintain customer relations

Preserve valid evidenceWe also determined that we only had three valid and definable alternatives:

Re-hire

Offer settlement Take the case to trial

Our team used the Nominal Group Technique, with limited success, to identifyour problem statement and trim all of our objectives into what we thought was agood list. This did not work very well because we did not fully understand at thattime what the difference between alternatives and objectives, and how theprocesses we would use worked. Once we began using the Delphi Method webegan to understand the correct way of eliminating and specifying objectives andalternatives. If we had figured this out earlier, much of our information could havebeen narrowed down, making the whole process considerably easier.

This is the end of the memo? This memo could be greatly improved by:

Write it in memo form as an executive summary Organizing it by project phase, with relevant headings to make it flow

better. (Discuss each step & how they lead you to the final outcome) Discuss alternatives Referencing and discussing the attachments (what they mean/ how

they were used) in the memo, including any scales used (i.e.,consequence matrix)

Providing more detail Reading through carefully to ensure proper grammar. Objectives reduced from 21 (Round Robin) to 16 (Delph scoring)

need I only see where you mentioned eliminate 2 objectives Alternatives: initial # 31 (Consequence matrix) reduced to 16 (Delphi

scoring): Need discussion about HOW you eliminated/combinedthese alternatives.

Discuss Importance / Achievement Scores (what do they mean?How did you come up with them) or outcome of Delphi method

Assign 5/10 points

Comment [jld4]: HOW?

Comment [jld5]: What submand revisions?

Comment [jld6]: How did yodetermine this?

Comment [jld7]: Poor gramm


5/12

Nominal Group Technique

Problem Statement:

How should North Central Power Company respond to the situation broughtabout by Mrs. Gilby and Mr. Adam's allegations?

Objectives:

1. Maintain Morale2. Minimize Financial Loss3. Preserve Public Image4. Maintain Positive Public Relations5. Minimize effectd to established business relationships6. Maintain Credibility / Reputation7. Minimize Company Improprieties8. Preserve Integrity (corp. and Employees)9. Ensure that truth outweighs allegations

10. Demonstrate plaintiffs were acting out of character of companies

management11. Maintain Companies Best Interest12. Maintain Customer Relations13. Preserve Relevant Valid Evidence14. Minimize Negative Press15. Reduce Loss of Customers16. Edit Company Policies17. Do Not Admit Guilt18. Educate Employees19. Avoild Long Drawn Out Court Proceedings20. Reduce Loss

Good1 point deducted for typographical errors: 9/10 points


6/12

CONSEQUENCE MATRIX

ALTERNATIVES

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

Want Objectives

Maintain Morale P F P F F P P P F F F F P F F F F F F F F

Minize Financial Loss F G P F P P P F F F F F F G G G G F G F F

Preserve Public Image P F P F F P F P G G G G P F F F F F F G G

Maintain Positive Public Relations P F P F F P F P F F F F F F F F F G F F F

Minimize Effects to Established Business Relationships P F P F F P P P F F F F P G G G G F G F F

Maintain Credibility/Reputation P F F F F P P P F F F F F F F F F G F F F

Minimize Company Improprieties P P F P F P P F F F F F F F F F F F F F F

Preserve Integrity (Corp.& Employees) P F P F F P P P F F F F F P P P P F P F F

Maintain Company's Best Interest P F P F G P F P G G G G G F F F F F F G G

Maintain Customer Relations P F P F F P F P F F F F F G G G G F G F F

Preserve Valid Evidence F P F P F P F P G G G G P F F F F G F G G

Minimize Negative Press F F P F G P P P G G G G F F F F F F F G G

Reduce Loss of Customers P F P F F P P P F F F F F F F F F F F F F

Edit Company Policies P P P P F P P P P P P P P F F F F F F P P

Educate Employees P P P P G P F F F F F F F F F F F F F F F

Key to the grading scale: .

G=GoodF=Fair

P=Poor

Scale for the alternative that each number represents:

17. Settle outside of court, keep employees informed, change ethics code, and restructure management

18. Go to court armed with indisputable proof that Gilby and Adams were acting independently and wrongfully, and use the publicity as a platform to run positive PR a

National Power Company.

13. restructure management

14. Settle outside of court

15. Settle outside of court and keep employees informed

16. Settle outside of court, keep employees informed, and change ethics code

9. Take the case to trial10. Take the case to trial and keep employees informed

11. Take the case to trial, keep employees informed, and change ethics code

12. Take the case to trial, keep employees informed, change ethics code, a

5. Incorporate employees to identify a solution

6. Bribe jury members to vote in favor

7. Accept partial guilt on a lesser scale

8. Place blame on an upper mgmt. employee rather than company. (fire upper mgr)

1. Re-hire

2. Offer Settlement

3. Accept full blame

4. Bring a counter-suit


7/12

29. Have supporting evidence to show the public and employees of being creditable

30. Do whatever it takes to maintain the companys best interest

31. Only present relative and valid information

25. Find a way to cut down on the settlement amount or the amount spent in court

26. Do something nice for the customers so that they get a good feeling about the company

27. Inform the employees with the events that are going on in court

28. Show the public and employees that they are an ethical company

21. Attempt to have case thrown out by the judge by providing overwhelming evidence from the outset, saving the companys image and avoiding the cost of a trial.

22. Rewrite company policy to avoid being sued again for the same thing

23. Setup guidelines that management is supposed to follow

24. Setup privacy policy for employees

19. Settle out of court, saving the company money and avoiding a long and drawn out public trial. Use the press to present the truth about Gilby and Adams. Distribute

in addition to posting a public statement about Trans-National Power Companys ethical standards and practices on the company website.

20. Go to court with relevant evidence proving that there was no wrongdoing on the part of the company, while running a series of ads highlighting the positive aspects

stewardship and philanthropy in order to retain current customers and attract new ones. Prove that Gilby and Adams were acting out of character of company managem


8/12

The Rogue Division Project

Delphi MethodSumFinal

Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Alternative 5 AlternaRe-hire Offer Settlement Accept full blame Bring a counter-suit Incorporate employees

to identify a solution

Bribe jury m

vote in

Objective 1

Max 0.05 2.00 10.00 1.00 8.00 9.00 2.0

Min 0.03 0.00 5.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.0

Average 0.04 1.20 7.60 0.40 4.60 6.00 0.6

Objective 2

Max 0.37 10.00 9.00 1.00 8.00 5.00 3.0

Min 0.17 6.00 1.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.0

Average 0.23 9.20 6.60 0.20 6.00 3.20 1.4

Objective 3

Max 0.10 10.00 5.00 1.00 8.00 5.00 2.0

Min 0.03 1.00 2.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 0.0

Average 0.08 5.00 3.60 0.60 6.00 3.40 0.6

Objective 4

Max 0.05 10.00 4.00 1.00 8.00 6.00 0.0

Min 0.02 2.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 0.0

Average 0.03 4.80 2.80 0.60 6.20 4.20 0.0

Objective 5

Max 0.08 10.00 5.00 1.00 9.00 8.00 0.0Min 0.03 1.00 2.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 0.0

Average 0.06 4.60 4.00 0.60 6.60 4.80 0.0

Objective 6

Max 0.15 10.00 5.00 6.00 8.00 6.00 0.0

Min 0.03 0.00 2.00 1.00 5.00 0.00 0.0

Average 0.09 4.20 4.00 2.60 7.00 3.80 0.0

Objective 7

Max 0.03 2.00 4.00 4.00 8.00 5.00 0.0

Min 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0

Average 0.01 1.00 2.20 2.40 4.40 3.60 0.0

Objective 8

Max 0.15 10.00 5.00 4.00 9.00 8.00 0.0

Min 0.03 1.00 2.00 1.00 5.00 0.00 0.0

Average 0.07 4.00 3.40 2.80 7.20 5.60 0.0

Objective 9

Max 0.05 9.00 10.00 2.00 10.00 5.00 10.Min 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0

Average 0.02 4.60 5.00 0.80 6.20 3.80 4.0

Objective 10

Max 0.13 9.00 10.00 4.00 8.00 6.00 1.0

Min 0.03 1.00 4.00 1.00 5.00 0.00 0.0

Average 0.08 4.20 6.40 2.00 6.80 4.40 0.2

Objective 11

Max 0.14 0.00 5.00 1.00 10.00 5.00 8.0

Min 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.00 0.00 0.0

Importance Score


9/12



Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Alternative 5 AlternaRe-hire Offer Settlement Accept full blame Bring a counter-suit Incorporate employees

to identify a solution

Bribe jury m

vote in

Importance Score

Average 0.09 0.00 2.40 0.20 8.80 2.40 2.2

Objective 12

Max 0.06 10.00 8.00 1.00 8.00 5.00 1.0

Min 0.03 1.00 4.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 0.0

Average 0.04 6.00 6.60 0.60 6.60 3.60 0.2

Objective 13

Max 0.15 10.00 10.00 1.00 9.00 5.00 1.0

Min 0.05 1.00 4.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 0.0

Average 0.12 4.60 6.60 0.20 6.80 4.00 0.2

Objective 14

Max 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.00 1.0

Min 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0

Average 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 0.2

Objective 15

Max 0.02 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 10.00 1.0

Min 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0

Average 0.01 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.20 6.60 0.2

Objective 16

Max 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0

Min 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0

Average 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.0

Average

Weighted Total 4.95 5.01 0.88 6.44 3.86 0.7


10/12



Objective 1

Max

Min

Average

Objective 2

Max

Min

Average

Objective 3

Max

Min

Average

Objective 4

Max

Min

Average

Objective 5

MaxMin

Average

Objective 6

Max

Min

Average

Objective 7

Max

Min

Average

Objective 8

Max

Min

Average

Objective 9

MaxMin

Average

Objective 10

Max

Min

Average

Objective 11

Max

Min

Alternative 9 Alternative 10 Alternative 11 Alternative 12 Alternative 13 Alternative 14 AltSettle outside of court Go to court armed with

indisputable proof that

Gilby and Adams were

Use the publicity as a

platform to run positive

PR ads highlighting

Rewrite company policy

to avoid being sued

again for the same thing

Cut down on the

settlement amount or

the amount spent in

Inform the employees

with the events that are

going on in court

Show

employ

an et

8.00 9.00 9.00 4.00 1.00 8.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

4.60 6.40 6.00 1.60 0.20 5.00

9.00 10.00 4.00 4.00 8.00 2.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

6.60 6.20 2.60 2.20 6.00 1.40

9.00 10.00 10.00 5.00 3.00 5.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

5.00 7.00 7.20 3.40 2.20 3.60

7.00 9.00 10.00 4.00 2.00 7.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

4.20 6.40 7.80 2.20 1.00 4.60

9.00 10.00 8.00 6.00 2.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

4.80 7.40 6.00 3.20 0.60 3.40

5.00 10.00 8.00 5.00 2.00 7.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.20 7.40 5.00 3.20 0.80 4.20

6.00 10.00 6.00 10.00 2.00 5.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.80 7.20 3.60 5.40 0.80 3.60

5.00 10.00 6.00 6.00 2.00 6.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

3.20 7.40 4.60 3.40 1.20 4.20

8.00 10.00 7.00 5.00 5.00 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

4.40 7.40 4.80 3.40 3.00 3.00

7.00 8.00 10.00 5.00 3.00 5.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

4.40 5.40 7.40 3.40 1.60 3.00

2.00 10.00 4.00 4.00 2.00 6.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00


11/12



Average

Objective 12

Max

Min

Average

Objective 13

Max

Min

Average

Objective 14

Max

Min

Average

Objective 15

Max

Min

Average

Objective 16

Max

Min

Average

Average

Weighted Total

Alternative 9 Alternative 10 Alternative 11 Alternative 12 Alternative 13 Alternative 14 AltSettle outside of court Go to court armed with

indisputable proof that

Gilby and Adams were

Use the publicity as a

platform to run positive

PR ads highlighting

Rewrite company policy

to avoid being sued

again for the same thing

Cut down on the

settlement amount or

the amount spent in

Inform the employees

with the events that are

going on in court

Show

employ

an et

0.80 7.40 2.60 2.00 0.80 2.60

10.00 5.00 10.00 5.00 3.00 4.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

5.80 3.40 8.00 3.00 1.40 2.20

4.00 9.00 9.00 4.00 2.00 3.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

2.40 6.40 6.40 2.40 0.80 2.20

0.00 1.00 2.00 10.00 0.00 3.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.20 0.60 8.00 0.00 2.00

1.00 3.00 4.00 6.00 0.00 10.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.40 1.20 2.20 3.40 0.00 8.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

4.17 6.40 4.95 2.78 2.23 2.90


12/12

Points awarded: 5 / 10 points

Requirements Points Points AwardedMemo 10 5Nominal Group output 10 9Consequence matrix 10 5Delphi Scoring matrix 10 10

Risk Profile 5 2.5Risk Desirability matrix 5 2.5

TOTAL 50 34

Final score 34/50 = 68%

Rogue Division Project MGS 4000 Mrs. Liggett de Jong Purple

Documents

Transcript of Rogue Division Project MGS 4000 Mrs. Liggett de Jong Purple