HANDSTAR

INC.
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
PROF. RUPESH KUMAR PATI

By Group – 15
Nitin Gupta – 210
Rushabh Tibrewala Shankara Bhakthula Vishwas342

INTRODUCTION  Handstar Inc.5 million  Its first Product was an Expense Report Application  Additional software products:  A program for tracking and measuring the performance of investment portfolios  Calendar program  A program that allowed users to download their email messages from their PC  New project ideas:  Development of a Spreadsheet Program  Web Browser  Trip Planner Program . developed software applications for handheld computing devices  The organization had ten employees with annual sales worth $1.

a strong market position  Assumptions:  We have assumed that all projects are completed at the same time  The lifetime (revenue generation) of each project starts at the same time ie from the date of completion of each project  The total manpower available can be used for the suggested projects and no other existing project is requiring manpower .OBJECTIVE: OBJECTIVE OF THE CASE  To select the best project option from existing programs and three new project ideas based on the cost involved. revenues expected and its importance in giving Handstar Inc.

324.042. of hours 1 2 4 6 1875 6250 1250 400 .23 4 Update Project 2 Expense report $607.501.97 2 Recommendation: Projects that we can select based on no.024.PROJECT SELECTION BASED ON NPV Project Type Project Name NPV Ranking Update Project 1 Integration of calendar and e-mail $1.944.898.575.22 5 New Project 1 Spreadsheet Program $2.862.779.11 6 Update Project 3 Portfolio tracking system $1.218. so project ranked 6 is also taken as with less man-hours required it could easily fit in available time Ranking New Project 2 New project 3 Update Project 1 Update Project 2 Total no.155.51 3 New Project 2 Web Browser $6.70 1 New Project 3 Trip Planner $2. of hours available (10000 hours) We have tried to keep maximum number of projects so as to utilize the manpower effectively.

WEIGHTED SCORE METHOD FOR PROJECT SELECTION  We have to take into consideration two aspects: Will the project attain a leadership position in the market and extent of its internet usage Sno. Project Type Project Leadership Position Internet Usage 1 Update Integration of calendar and email Moderate Moderate 2 Update Expense Report High Low 3 Update Portfolio Tracking System High Moderate 4 New Application Spreadsheet Program Moderate No 5 New Application Web Browser Low High 6 New Application Trip Planner Low High .

hence we have chosen next two projects with lesser ranks .97 36.65 35.05 4 5 3 6 1 2 1250 400 750 2500 1875 6250 Criteria Weight Development Hrs Update Project 1 Assuming the weight of NPV twice the leadership and internet usage aspect.67 100 100 66. we see that with no.WEIGHTED SCORE METHOD FOR PROJECT SELECTION NPV 50% Update Project Update Project New Project New Project New Project 2 3 1 2 3 23. we choose the same 4 projects as chosen based on NPV alone The no.67 0 100 100 44.97 17.42 Leadership position 25% 66.89 100.37 66. hence leads to lot of unutilized time.67 33.34 55.11 83. of hours utilized by update project 3 is very less.67 33.00 43.95 37.83 50.37 33. of available hours.37 Internet use 25% Weighted average score Rank 66.23 8.

HIRING ADDITIONAL SOFTWARE DEVELOPERS  Available Man-hours on hiring one software engineer: 12500 hours  Following projects would be chosen with new manpower: 5 projects in each case (highlighted in yellow)  ON NPV BASIS Update Project 1 Update Project 2 Update Project 3 New Project 1 New Project 2 New Project 3   Integration of calendar and e-mail Expense report Portfolio tracking system Spreadsheet Program Web Browser Trip Planner Hours 1250 400 750 2500 1875 6250 Rank (based on Npv) 4 6 5 3 1 2 12275 ON WEIGHTED AVG SCORE BASIS  Update Project 1 Update Project 2 Update Project 3 New Project 1 New Project 2 New Project 3   Hours Integration of calendar and e-mail Expense report Portfolio tracking system Spreadsheet Program Web Browser Trip Planner 1250 400 750 2500 1875 6250 10525 Unutilized manpower 1975 Rank (based on Weighted Avg score) 4 5 3 6 1 2 .

in any organization.CONCLUSION  4 projects each can be done with available manhours  5 projects could be done with hiring one more developer. without considering any qualitative factors . some manpower needs to kept for ongoing processes and functions  All the recommendations are solely made on NPV and weighted score basis. but would increase the cost  The most basic assumption here is that all manpower is utilized in whatever projects we suggest  However.