Issues during Project scoping

phase
Date
S/ Reported Date
Issues Issue Discussing and Description Reported by Assigned to Priority Resolution
N Resolved

Consultant
The scope was not clearly defined
(JPMA, The scope is
initially that the factory whether to
India), clearly defined
stand independently or to use common Operation
December January and became
Ambiguity boiling house plant with expanding the manager of Contractor
1 High precise that to use
capacity only for boiling the juice, existing (OIA) 2005 2006
factory the existing
when the expansion factory decided to And boiling house by
be started. This leads to unnecessary
Project expansion.
work and confusion.
manager

the scope
Agriculture document became
Department finalized and
Transient scopes on the crushing
remain unaltered
capacity of the expansion project by the Research
Consultant team, for the duration of
contractor (OIA India) and the April
Transience February the project to be
2 Ethiopian sugar corporation because of (JPMA, India), Contractor High
2006 2006 with capacity of
unclear sugar cane delivery capacity. (OIA)
7000TCD, after
This lead to scope creep—the primary
And the clear scope of
cause of late deliveries.
sugar cane
Project
manager delivery is
reported.

2
The scope of the expansion project
Contractor the scope
initially decided and prepared by the
(OIA), document
contractor (OIA) and sugar
modified and
corporations only, without consulting Operation Project Novembe
Un- March prepared again by
the senior management, technical manager of manager, r
3 Collaborative And
Medium shared with all
persons and society of Fincha sugar existing 2006
Scope factory 2005 stakeholders at
factory. This causes to Existing every step of the
misinterpretations in requirements and factory scope definition
designs on the scope and integration operation. process.
with the existing factory.

There was not skilled management stuff Consultant An effective

Poor from the client fincha sugar factory (JPMA, change
who can follow the preparation of India), January March management
management Sugar
4 scope of the expansion factory either it High process was
of scope and is on schedule, with quality and corporation & 2006 2006 established and
requirements requirements which leads to scope properly followed
Project
creep. manager by the concerned.

Issues during Project

Planning Phase
Date
S/ Reported Date
Issues Issue Discussing and Description Reported by Assigned to Priority Resolution
N Resolved

All concerned stakeholders such as the Existing The schedule

existing factory managements didn’t factory
rearranged by
participate In planning phase of the Operation
Existing manager, April considering the
expansion project like schedules and
1 Stakeholders Factory medium June 2006 operation and
budgets this created gap on assigning of operation & 2006
involvement overhaul
experienced and junior workers from
Project
maintenance
the existing factory due to operation
manager seasons.
time ,

3
Included on the
Consultant Project plan with when
Tasks such as Disposal of ash / press
manager & February March and how to work
Availability of mud, Routing of overhead EHV
2 & Existing High program after the
unplanned transmission line and bagasse storage Contractor
Factory 2006 2006 plan is reviewed
tasks shed were not included in planning of
operation (OIA, India)
how and when to accomplish the tasks. by the concerned
stakeholders.
The schedule
The planned schedule to accomplish the rearranged to
expansion project was too tight, that is Factory consider the
it didn’t consider the operation and Existing operation operation time and
Schedule overhaul time of the existing factory, Factory Project April May included the
3 since during operation time can’t work operation manager & medium compensating time
tasks on the merging plant of boiling 2006 2006 by making two
Contractor
house, that is the task is only allowed manager shifts work
during overhaul time this made the (OIA, India) arrangement for
schedule very tight. adding extra
working time.

The initially allotted budget was based Sponsor /

on the initial schedule of the expansion sugar At the end Extra budget
Project June
4 Budget project, it didn’t consider the budget corporation High of June allocated for the
manager & consultant 2006
required for extra time tasks due to tight 2006 extra time work.
schedule. (JPMA)

After the expansion

During the design of the expansion Existing land for supply of
Project
project from extraction plant to boiler Factory July sugar cane is clearly
manager & May
and power house plant there was a operation identified the design
5 Design issue Contractor
High 2006
capacity difference due to unclear & consultant 2006 of all plants are
information of sugar cane supply fixed to be
(OIA, India) considering of
capacity for the expansion. (JPMA)
7000TCD.

4
Issues in Project
implementation Phase
Date
S/ Report Date
Issues Issue Discussing and Description Reported by Assigned to Priority ed Resolution
N Resolved

The expansion sugar factory project was

planned considering the skilled man
Sponsor /
Few experts brought
power is available in local market for
sugar January from India and
implementation of the project, but the Contractor August
corporation trained a lot of local
1 Skilled man contractor couldn’t find adequate skilled High 2008
(OIA,India) & consultant 2007 engineers,technicans
power man power in local market due to the
and operators for 6
sugar technology is not that much broad (JPMA)
months.
in Ethiopia to have many experienced
people.
Made deal with
Supply and suppliers who can
Lack of availability of all required facility supply quality
materials and equipment for management materials on time and
consultant July December
2 implementing the project on schedule & High convince as much as
Material supply (JPMA) 2007 2007
due to supply delay, shortage of foreign possible to the top
currency and delay of release budgets. Contractor management to
(OIA,India) release budget as
soon as possible..
The project manager
Inadequate provided the team
There was a poor communication on Project
leaders and members
Communication both sides, the project manager and the consultant manager June September with clear directions
3 team as well as the project manager and medium
(JPMA) & 2007 2007 and feedback on their
sugar corporation which caused poor
performance and
task performance on the project. contractor
obligations regarding
the project.
5
6
Issues in Project close out Phase
Date
Reported Assigned Date
S/N Issues Issue Discussing and Description Priority Resolve Resolution
by to Reported
d

The closeout process of the expansion project

Lost consultant
includes so many individual pieces of Only Key closeout documents
informati
on and information, such as emails and file Existing (JPMA) like warranties, lien releases, and
distribution, 40% of initial data created during Factory June October facilities training documents and
1 paper & High
work design and construction phases are lost by operation 2013 2013 technical installation and
project closeout. Those documents they had at manger Project maintenance manuals were able
the beginning of the project, lost due to luck of to recovered
Manger
document management system.

More professionals asked from

There was high challenge and dispute in the existing factory as they were
Existing interested to organize the
Fatiguing project close out (testing and commissioning Factory
documents for their future
of the phase) phase of the project due to Loss of team consultant operation
functionality as some members complete their manger November January operation, and interestingly
2 Project (JPMA) Medium involved on the progress of close
Team tasks, Project team members became heavily & 2013 2014 out for their believed that they
involved in startup activities on the expansion
Project
will get practical knowledge they
project, and Loss of interest in tasks such as had great contribution on
Manager
documentation and administrative work. replacing the exhausted project
teams.

The expansion factory had start up problem for

producing of quality sugar and ethanol. Loss of Contractor Testing and commissioning
consultant
control of the charges to the project as things & February April process is re-arranged to be led
Technical
3 were winding down people started doing (JPMA) High by experts and trained people
issues Project 2014 2014
'whatever it takes' to get through the final push for smooth close out with quality
often damaging the project budget. And Hand- Manger production.
off issues in transition to tech support.
7
8