component 1 (1)
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
University of West London *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
3
Subject
Information Systems
Date
Nov 24, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
6
Uploaded by CommodoreKudu2300
Contents
Introduction
.................................................................................................................................................
2
Overview of Marble Arch mound
................................................................................................................
2
Cost
.............................................................................................................................................................
2
Failures
........................................................................................................................................................
3
Design and Installation
..........................................................................................................................
3
Failed architect
......................................................................................................................................
3
Budget failure
........................................................................................................................................
4
Early opening
.........................................................................................................................................
4
Recommendations for avoiding failure in future projects
............................................................................
4
Recommendation no 1
...........................................................................................................................
4
Recommendation no 2
...........................................................................................................................
5
Recommendation no 3
...........................................................................................................................
5
Recommendation no 4
...........................................................................................................................
5
Conclusion
...................................................................................................................................................
5
References
...................................................................................................................................................
5
Introduction
The opening of this mound occurred before it was completed because of poor and insufficient
management. Its huge amount of cost or budget is also very surprising for everyone. There are
not any claims made in this report related to issues with Mound and its other parts. Further, it is
very evident that all legislative restrictions have prevented the opportunities for addressing
deliverables and cost of this Hill project occasionally. As result of the poor planning in this
report, the Venture ascended this Hill without any notice of chamber. The anticipated budget of
almost £1.25 million was shifted to total £6 million, making it project failure. That budget then
shifted to £8 for covering the hill covered by dead trees and weeds (
WIGGINS III, 1982).
A poignant account of failure of this project found multiple administrative failures and
deliberating an attempt for hiding all rising costs from councilors. This mound got unveiled in
2021 February for bringing people back to the central point of London after pandemic. An
operational cost of almost £6m was applied in this project completion. According to a report
generated by government officials, managers of this project were not able for keeping and
implementing the financial plan until its opening date. Managers were not able to give an exact
estimate of cost required for this project completion, so they misrepresented and mismanaged
project cost and that became major reason for project failure. Based on our experience, in this
report we will point out major flaws in this project and then we will give you few
recommendations by which you can avoid such mistakes which were made in Marble arch
mound (
Greenhalgh, 2009).
Overview of Marble Arch mound
Westminster Council was managing this huge project and an estimated of £6m was spent on this.
This was considered as biggest disappointment of project and it was widespread publicity when
this matter was covered by the social media. Completely free tickets would be given to general
public for making people aware of this central place. The Mound, which was built at the
intersection of Hyde Park and Oxford Street, offered a unique perspective of the city, a large
green space, and an inside light show. It will be a part of the borough's "smarter and greener"
future, according to the Westminster Council.
When the tourist visit this place, they got surprised by its obvious imperfection. The photos
which were shared with public on social media were completely different from the actual view.
The scaffolding was completely visible which was used for building the structure (
Rich, 1836).
Unfortunately, this project was unable to meet the expectation which were planned for it, and its
installation received bundle of criticism after its inauguration. Mound was expected for being
exhibition attraction but it was much difficult for getting complete in specific timeframe. It was
constructed so that people could come out from their homes and enjoy the beautiful view of
artificial hill after experiencing bad effects of COVID-19.
Cost
Marble arch mound took £6 million for being completed but that project got seriously failed
because of diverse reasons and it also faced huge level of criticism. At this amount, 30 new
houses could have been created for the poor people at easy instalments or affordable rents. In an
emergency, it would cost £1,426 to effectively assist the needy on the streets. According to
Westminster Council, £6 million might have driven roughly 4,200 of her residents off the streets.
Instead, we got the ignorant mound, which had less than 1,400 visitors per day despite being free
for 6 months. The Oxford Street retail checkouts are unaffected by the 1,400 more clients.
Failures
Design and Installation
Rotterdam-based architect MVRDV said the project, which went through numerous design
changes and became a laughing stock when it opened before it was finished last summer, should
have been a celebration of London but became a “loveless installation”. It was said by MVRDV
that its recommendations became totally ignored, its layout also became toned down, and price
of its layout climbed up to 0.8% of general cost of this task.
That execution was not helped by English Heritage and Historic England, who apparently
decided that it would be inappropriate for the installation to sit directly above Marble Arch. This
decision forced the council to relocate the project to a smaller plot of land directly adjacent to the
monument. The structure of this Mound was designed by John Nash in 1827 to be the state
entrance to the cour d'honneur of Buckingham Palace (
Aller, 1991).
Another critic was displayed by an analyst of London, he added that the place at which this
mound is installed is not suitable for it and for general public. Place is one of the most important
and crucial factor for any project. Its success and failure is indirectly attached with this factor. If
a suitable place is selected for your project, then it can come out to be successful, but if the place
is not suitable according to your project, then it can creates multiple problems and issues in terms
of project completion and success. He further said this project should had been installed at
another place of city so that more people could visit it and helps for generating a high level of
revenue. The failure of this task became in large part due to their poor expertise of plants. The task's failure became in large part because of their lack of expertise of plants. A complete
loss of plant knowledge may be evident in the belief that the sedum matting will settle in and
transform into the fluffy plants represented in the preliminary drawings.
Failed architect
One of the major flaw in this project was its failed architect and it was highly criticized for that.
Not any clear prospects were provided and the admission fee were waived after refund of many
visitors. The 25-metre (82 ft) high hill was built from scaffolding covered with sedum turf and a
number of trees, with 130 steps up (or a lift) to a viewing platform at the top and an events space
inside. Because of its poor construction and design, this artificial hill was labelled as the worst
attraction point of London. Before its inauguration, people settled out high expectations from this
visiting point, but when visitors interacted with this point physically, they got highly
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
disappointed because of its looks, design and structure. All expectations regarding Mound’s
architect and council were unfounded (
Fielding, 2018).
Budget failure
The failure of the project has harmed the Mayor of London's strategic attempts to expand the
quantity and quality of green and open spaces around the city. Furthermore, urban parks and
green areas are under risk of being demolished to make way for new dwellings. It is complete
failure of this project that it shows willingness of local government for investing in green spaces,
despite of the indirect financial benefits. The real funding of this project has declined and it is
also seen as moneymaker and economic drain. Rather than to focus over revenue generated by
tourism, the cities could increase access with play, nature and its interaction with their
community through investing in the nature.
The project management lost almost a revenue of £1.5 million because of their spending in
artificial hill making and their decision for not charging the tickets. Further, a factor of bad
publicity approach cost them almost £290,000 in their sponsorship losses. About 140,000 visitors
have visited this hill since its date of opening which is a very small number as compared with its
budget and effort. But, the Mound remained unfinished and over budget in its initial few months
of opening (
Schier, 1992).
Early opening
26 July 2021 was the date when this project was unrelieved to general public. The mound opens
but its cafe and light exhibition are missing. Plants began to drop off and die immediately. Poor
condition of the sedum and planting forced the management for temporarily closing it when it
was opened on 26 July. The chamber of commerce was warned by the MVRDV that the
company was not eligible to open. A light exhibition opens inside the mound seven weeks later
than planned. It is also claimed by the MVRDV that we already warned project management
related to possible early opening of this project, but they ignored it and their irrational ignorance
and decision resulted in non-pleasant results. You can imagine its mismanagement that this
famous touring place opened before the actual data of its completion, which lead to press reports
and social media to praise its poor appearance (
Veevers, 1988).
Recommendations for avoiding failure in future projects
Recommendations are arguably one of the most crucial and critical phase of any project
completion and success. In this phase, you suggest particular strategies and interventions for
addressing the all constraints and issues which are identified in assessment phase. By
experiencing the recent failure of this project, here are few recommendations which are given
below so that the project manager could become able to minimize these factors which becomes
project failure.
Recommendation no 1
For ensuring the high level competency and capacity, recommend resource options of senior
level through conducting proper research. Senior structure of Board would be evaluated by the
chief executives in 3 months of this report for ensuring appropriate level of the competencies,
skills and required resources. She or he would make required changes in recommendation of
cabinet and chair (
Nelson, 2007).
Recommendation no 2
The risks which are already identified in this paper could be easily mitigated through improving
the oversight process for the high profile endeavors, for example inadequate management,
circumventions of the present governance system and major project overruns. For strengthening
the project management process, suggestions includes high risk initiatives and high profile
business partners. As a matter of deliberation and impartial oversight, the business partners
should ensure the level of objectivity in council board, executive leadership, and executive
director.
Recommendation no 3
It is recommended to conduct a proper research before launching of any project. If proper
research about the budget, resources, target market, customers, installation and organization is
not conducted, then it could be very harmful and dangerous for that project and project could
lead to failure. The purpose of research is to inform action. Thus, your study should seek to
contextualize its findings within the larger body of research (
Scholl, 2002).
Recommendation no 4
Review of the office/member records is provided top level priority from standard committee. It
should be done for making cabinet members and officer more effectively to receive and provide
independent and clear advices. We wish to continue to extend the benefits of members and
officers working together. Despite the fact that there is no indication of concerns in all Council
areas relating to contacts between Minister and senior leaders and executives, this evaluation
gives an opportune opportunity to rethink the present Ministerial/Official Protocol requirements.
Conclusion
The Marble arch mound was opened before its completion because of poor level rigor in the
project management. Budget of project has been exceeded significantly. There were plenty of the
issues and problem in installation of Mound in London. Although, all issues which were found in
this review needs to be solve carefully in future by following the recommendations which are
mentioned in this report. The Council seeks to learn from the leadership of the Marble Arch
mound Project as set out in 4 recommendations in this report.
References
WIGGINS III, W. D. (1982).
Depositional history and microspar development in reducing pore
water, Marble Falls Limestone (Pennsylvanian) and Barnett Shale (Mississippian), central
Texas
. The University of Texas at Austin.
Greenhalgh, M. (2009).
Marble past, monumental present: building with antiquities in the
mediaeval Mediterranean
(Vol. 80). Brill.
Rich, C. J. (1836). Narrative of a Residence in Koordistan, and on the Site of Ancient Nineveh:
With Journal of a Voyage Down the Tigris to Bagdad and an Account of a Visit to Shirauz and
Persepolis. J. Duncan.
Aller, L. (1991).
Handbook of suggested practices for the design and installation of ground-
water monitoring wells
. Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, Office of Research and
Development, US Environmental Protection Agency.
Fielding, C. R. (2018). Stratigraphic architecture of the Cenozoic succession in the McMurdo
Sound region, Antarctica: An archive of polar palaeoenvironmental change in a failed rift
setting.
Sedimentology
,
65
(1), 1-61.
Schier, S. E. (1992). Deficits without End: Fiscal Thinking and Budget Failure in
Congress.
Political Science Quarterly
,
107
(3), 411-433.
Powell, C. M., Roots, S. R., & Veevers, J. J. (1988). Pre-breakup continental extension in East
Gondwanaland and the early opening of the eastern Indian Ocean.
Tectonophysics
,
155
(1-4),
261-283.
Nelson, R. R. (2007). IT project management: Infamous failures, classic mistakes, and best
practices.
MIS Quarterly executive
,
6
(2).
Pardo, T. A., & Scholl, H. J. J. (2002, January). Walking atop the cliffs: Avoiding failure and
reducing risk in large scale e-government projects. In
Proceedings of the 35th annual Hawaii
international conference on system sciences
(pp. 1656-1665). IEEE.
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help