1

Case Study 1.2 the Hokies Lunch Group

(Viktoria, Jasper and Fatma)

Student’s Name:

Institutional Affiliation:

Course Name and Number:

Instructor’s Name:

Assignment Due Date:

 2

Case Study 1.2 the Hokies Lunch Group

1. For each part (A, B, C), what phase of the project life cycle is each project?

Explain.

At part A, the project which was being handled by Fatma was at the initiation stage. The

rationale behind my perspective regarding Fatma's project is based on Fatma's statement

when she was taking lunch in a hotel with her two friends. The two friends to Fatma were

Viktoria and Jasper. Fatma works with a thriving internet company in partnership with

several companies in the construction industry (Wu & Cormican, 2016). She shared with

Viktoria and Jasper that they have been struggling with defining the scope of the project.

Also, in part A, the project which is being handled by Jasper is at the initiation stage. For the

case of Viktoria, her discussion in part A about the task of PAX 2 implies that this project

was at stage three, which is that of project implementation.

Moreover, for Part B of the discussions among Viktoria, Jasper, and Fatma, it is reflected

that the project which was being handled by Viktoria was still at the project execution stage.

When she met with her friends, she stated that she had good news that their alternative

project was doing well, which was being exemplified through passing tests (Wu &

Cormican, 2016). At part B, Jasper and his team handled the project at the project planning

stage, whereby the business's potential risks are analyzed. Also, the project which was being

held by Fatma was at the planning stage, and this is depicted from her seeking advice from

her friends on how to schedule the project execution (Wu & Cormican, 2016). Viktoria, at

Part B, handles the project was still at the project implementation stage. This is reflected in

Viktoria’s report to her friends that she had good news and bad news. According to Viktoria,

the good news was that their project manner mitigated risk measures against the execution of

the project by launching an alternative running project.

 3

For Part C, the project which was being handled by Jasper and his two other colleagues

(Swedish, Alex, and Indian programmer, Raja), was at the project closure stage. This point of

view is based on the utterances made by Jasper to his friends, stating, “Despite our best

efforts we couldn’t deliver.” Also, for Fatma, the project she was handling was at the project

closure stage. Viktoria’s project was at the project closure stage, and this is depicted her

stating, “I hate closing out a project, it is boring.”

2. What are two important things you learned about working on projects from the

case? Why are they important?

The first aspect of project execution, which I learned from the case scenario of Viktoria,

Jasper, and Fatma, is that the stage of project initiation is very significant (Wu & Cormican,

2016). This is the critical determinant of the success of the project execution in question. For

instance, at this stage, the project goals are set. For example, the project that was being

handled by Jasper might have failed due to inadequate analysis of the project's plans at the

initiation stage.

The second aspect that I have learned that is essential for working on a project is

assessing the potential risks that might bring down the business venture (Wu & Cormican,

2016). This stage of project execution aids in streamlining any possible outliers that could

pose severe dangers to the project execution. The stated concern falls under project planning,

and it requires proper brainstorming of the initiated project among the assigned team for the

project execution.
 4

References

 The attached case study 1.2, the Hokies lunch group of Viktoria, Fatma, and Jasper.

Wu, Q., & Cormican, K. (2016). Shared leadership: An analysis of the evolvement process

across the project life cycle. International Journal of Innovation, Management, and

Technology, 7(6), 299.