加拿大毕业论文范文_dissertation代写范文

发布时间：2020-11-01 热度：

加拿大论文代写 代写paper 毕业论文代写，加拿大论文代写,多伦多硕士论文,代写本科毕业论文,代写essay，知名加拿大论文代写服务机构，细心负责的写作团队，可提供加拿大多伦多、温哥华、渥太华、蒙特利尔、卡尔加里等城市的本科及研究生毕业论文代写，唯一网址：www.mingxinwrite.com十年留学生服务经验，500+英语母语导师和硕博毕业生团队。

用心 严谨 Assignment，Essay/Report/Case/Paper/test辅助润色。强大的学术资源支撑＋经验丰富的专家团队＋标准化的客户服务程序。Average平均高达A。每年服务近万名学子。快速及时高效。附检测。服务: 10年行业经验, 了解打分机制, 免费查重, 专业对口匹配。
 

加拿大dissertation代写范文选节
 

Dissertation Objectives

 

Investigate the problems at the terminal 5 opening, especially with the baggage handling system despite extensive simulated testing using thousands of bags and more than two thousand volunteers in the run up to the opening of T5

 

Identify the necessary risk strategies to be considered for such mega-projects, the benefits of such approaches, taking into account previous failed and successful projects, and any lessons to be learnt

 

Discuss the implementation approach adopted by BAA and the risk associated with this approach

 

Provide formative evaluation summarising key findings and conclusion based on evidence gathered from research

T5 Synopsis

 

The terminal 5 project in addition to being a statement of intent for the future of British aviation was built with the aim of improving customer experience and to exhibit Heathrow as a world class international airport. The baggage handling system at T5 was designed to be the largest baggage handling system in Europe for a single terminal. The system consists of a main baggage sorter and a fast track system. The system was designed by an integrated team from BAA, BA and Vanderlande Industries of the Netherlands, with the aim of handling both intra-terminal and inter-terminal luggage. Its processing capacity was intended to be 70,000 bags a day. Bags are meant to undergo several processes on the way through the system, these include; automatic identification, explosives screening, fast tracking for urgent bags, sorting and automatic sorting and passenger reconciliation.

 

The scheduled completion and opening date was March 2008, and T5 was on time and on budget. This was a remarkable achievement especially in a sector where project delays and vast overspends are commonplace (the Millennium dome, Wembley stadium and the Scottish Parliament buildings were all opened late and cost a lot more than the original estimate). However, on its first day in operation, T5's bespoke baggage system was affected by technical software problems, which led to a number of issues, such as cancelled flights, lost baggage, and substantial delays, but more importantly, BA's challenge were its people issues and integrating teams of staff. Initial reports suggest that the day one issues were less to do with technology issues and more to do with inadequate staff training, and this was not just for one group of people but at all levels. Below is a summary of its problems on the opening day:

 

Hundreds of staff found it difficult finding the staff car park entrance

 

Check-in staff struggled with their systems, these problems ranged from very simple tasks such as logging into the baggage system to complex tasks

 

Security personnel who were totally ignorant of their new roles and had to be taken through new procedures in the morning in front of passengers

 

 

Ground staff and crews and ground staff getting lost inthe huge building

 

 

Baggage handlers struggled to get a hang of the new baggage system

 

Baggage truck drivers got lost within the terminal and needed directions to the aircraft

 

Baggage drivers and handlers could not get luggage from the conveyors to the gates

 

On nine occasions, inspectors from the department of transport had managed to bypass security checks during trials of the terminal's new systems and that the terminal's alarm system was not working properly

 

Going through these problems therefore suggest that the entire problem was down to lack of adequate training or simply inappropriate appraisal of risk involved. This is very surprising as this was a very high profile project and taking into account that this was a simple 3 team process - get baggage, take baggage to aircraft and load baggage onto aircraft.

 

Training & System Testing Prior to Opening

 

Based on initial interviews with BA's CIO, it would suggest that the human elements were given the importance it required. BA's CIO, Paul Coby told CIO UK [in March 2007] “the IT work to support such a large-scale, new-build project was also going well. “Devices are deployed, connections are being integrated and 2007 will be testing year. The airline is moving onto the T5 systems, so they run for a year ready to operate at the new terminal when it opens in 2008”.

 

According to XXXXX, in the run up to the opening of T5 there were a series of overnight baggage-systems tests using thousands of bags, up to 2000 volunteers and full trials of the check-in procedure for all the IT systems. According to the spokesman for Vanderlande Industries, in testing the baggage handling system, emulation models were utilized broadly to test the low-level controls software, while computer programs took the place of the baggage handling system, and which behave (almost) the same as the part they replace. The report also suggests that for the high-level controls software, the emulation model was broadened by connecting the loose individual models into a large integrated system in which the physical equipment was replaced by a number of interconnected emulation models. According to a number of the volunteers who tested the system prior to its opening commented that the demos were extremely impressive and felt the system was ready in advance of its opening.

 

T5 System Simulation Prior to Opening

 

According to the spokesman for Vanderlande Industries, low-level emulation models were utilized in place of the physical transport equipment in each of the conveyor lines. The low and high level models that were developed produced the same electrical outputs in response to the same electrical inputs as their corresponding physical equivalent (motors, photo-electric cells, barcode scanners, etc), which in the view of both the software developers and management of BA, proof of extensive system testing. System interaction was facilitated with the use of control panels, and with the right frequency, set of bags or multiple bags were generated. During the testing, the conveyor motors were stopped and started utilizing different scenarios in order to generate as much errors as possible with the hope of fixing them. The spokesman also stated that the transport time between two photocells in emulation was equal to the actual time using the real equipment. The same measurement also applied to the total transport time.

 

 

In addition, during testing the T5 project, over 90 individual low-level emulation models were created as individual models were integrated into 5 different configurations. A separate team spent 4800 hours on building and testing these emulation models.

 

Questions: Training & Testing

 

But the first set of questions now has to be asked: how adequate was the tests and training were carried out in relation to T5's baggage systems in advance of the opening? What were the results? What were the problems revealed? and what steps were taken to resolve the problems revealed? Were the tests re-run and, if so, what was the result? Was the right implementationstrategy adopted? Or would it not have been better to open Terminal 5 on a phased basis, to make sure that all its systems were working before going fully operational?

 

The second set of questions to be asked would be: knowing that extensive simulation testing was carried out on the baggage system successfully; doesn't that then suggest that carrying out simulated testing without the real customers is inadequate? With regards to the people issues, what sort of dry runs were carried out? If they were indeed adequate, why were the opening day hiccups not identified? Where there extra staff or volunteers in anticipation of potential glitches? If yes were these trained adequately? For every eventuality or possible scenario, what were the contingency plans?

 

In spite of the extensive testing carried out on the baggage system and the confidence which this would have placed on top management, from the experience on the opening day, we can conclude that in reality, the prospects of operating an airport terminal of such magnitude and scale would require more than simulated testing as the operations are virtually impossible to fully replicate. This then suggests that the risk management utilized by the BA was not robust to take the people issues into account. Good risk management might have come to the conclusion, if there was the possibility of failure.

 

Risk Management: Definitions

 

In order to manage risks we have to understand what a risk is. Smith and Merrit (2002) said that three essential aspects of risk are uncertainty, loss and time, see Figure 1.

 

Uncertainty: A project manager has to identify as many uncertainties as possible. A risk may or may not happen. This inherent uncertainty cannot be eliminated, but it can be made little clearer by clarifying the probability of occurrence of the risk, to get at better understanding of the consequences and alternatives if the risk occurs and determine the factors that influence the magnitude and likelihood of occurrence of the particular risk. This means that an uncertainty cannever be completely eliminated, but it can be reduced to a level the project find tolerable. This means that even with the best plans there cannot be any guarantees that there will be no surprises [3].

 

 

Loss: A risk is always something that involves some kind of loss. If there is no loss possible, then the project is not concerned about the risk, because it cannot compromise the project [3].

 

Time: Associated with every risk there is a time where the risk no longer exists. Either the risk has occurred and the loss has been suffered or the potential problems that could cause the risk have been resolved and no longer pose a threat. It is important to know when this time has arrived so the risk can be removed from the agenda [3].

 

Among writers and in the literature there are differences in the meaning of risk management and risk analysis. Frosdick (1997) says that there are no clear views of the differences and what one writer defines as risk management another writer is calling it risk analysis. Frosdick‘s own view is that he separates them by saying that risk analysis is the sum of the processes of risk identification, estimation and evaluation and risk management is about planning, monitoring and controlling activities that are produced by the risk analysis activity.

 

The Association for Project Management (Chapman, Simister 2004) definition of risk analysis is similar to Frosdick‘s, they have however divided the risk analysis into two stages. The first stage is called the Qualitative Analysis and it is where risks are identified and subjectively assessed. These identified risks are then analysed in terms of e.g. cost and time estimates and that is called the Quantitative Analysis. Just like for Frosdick it is then followed by the risk management process. In their definition it is the process of formulating responses, both proactive and reactive ones.

 

Pennock & Haimes (2001) said that risk management could be represented in six steps, three each for risk assessment/analysis and risk management, where each step is a question.

 

Risk assessment/analysis

 

What can go wrong? Identify as many risks as possible. The risks can be of any kind financial, time, resources etc. and no risk is too small to not be included [3].

 

What is the likelihood for the risk to occur? Try to measure how likely, or unlikely, it is for the risk to occur. Maybe some risks are dependent on each other [3].

 

What are the consequences? What will be the impact on the project if the risk occurs, is it a minor risk or maybe a stopping fault that endangers the whole project [3].

 

Risk management

 

What can be done and what options are available? How to decrease the chance of a risk occurring, for example get more resources or have them readily available [2,3].

 

What are the tradeoffs in term of all costs, benefits and risks among the available options? For every risk there is somewhere a limit for how costly measures one can put in, where there is no economy in putting in more measures.