MBA 520, So Far...

So Far …. MBA 520

One of the advantages that I found from the online newsgroup format is to start a discussion thread about a topic in context that is not necessarily in the class but ancillary to the teachings.
This allows a student to take real life scenarios that they are facing and share these with the class and solicit feedback.

This class was different from my first class MBA 500. What are the differences you ask? In MBA 500 there were a lot of student like me, they asked questions and we all shared information lavishly. An interesting thing about this class was that most of the interaction was just complaining about situation about work, or bashing problems in the world.

Call me mean but I have no time for such conversations, so my concern is whether this could have happened in a brink and mortar classroom or not?

Left to be seen!

The class was about transformation leadership. Summing up my experiences so far, the UPOX 9-Set PBL Model is becoming my friend. But more importantly, what did I really learn.

1. Leadership is not thought you are born with it. The class did not teach me this; I concluded this from my observation of my classmates, the discussion, the professor and the teachings.
2. Benchmarking is probably the most underused practice in corporate America; sadly it’s the most valuable from theoretical lenses.
3. Even in an online world, elite cliques are formed, just like in the hallways, the cool, the nerds, the intellectual, the hot (well not really) and the popular can be distinguished easily.
   

One suggestion, since this is an online forum, if there are simultaneous classes of the same type going on, swap the student around, having the same students go thought the same courses together for a long period I think may work to a disadvantage to the online approach.

My posting this morning to get professors’ attention and guarantee A+ again…hehe.

[RICHIE'S END-OF-CLASS DISCUSSION FOR MBA 520]

General Discussion for Class.

Hello all,

I came upon a challenge today that I have seen before but I have never been stared right in the face by the tiger itself.

As technology departments; and I speak on behalf of every rung on the ladder to the corner office, we “support the business”. About 5-10 years ago, senior leaders in the business started to adopt a new habit. This habit is what I call “The cosmopolitan RFP.” Business leaders when presented with a need for a body of work (scope of work) will outline this need in a BRD and then ask their internal technology departments to provide an estimate; they will then ALSO ask a few vendors to provide an estimate. Don’t confuse this with the build vs. buy argument; this is the build internally vs. build externally.

There are a lot of pros and cons that both the technology department and the business leaders agree on, for example, integration, support, maintenance, culture messing etc when pitting build internally vs. build externally. However the one that seems to be elusive to business leaders or at least in my experience as of late is the following:

A vendor (V1) will propose to provide a Scope of Work (SOF1) for an amount of X dollars. Internally technology will most times propose the cost of SOF1 to be X * 1.75. Business leaders have consistently choose V1 and their proposal for SOF1 at the cost of X only to be met with mid project increase in prices that can be X * 3 and as much as X * 5 sometimes.

My challenge is the following, when the internal IT department submits a proposal of X * 1.75 we are HELD to it, and if we go over budget we are considered failures. However when a vendor who “out bids” us (taken in the context of the cosmopolitan RFP) with a rate of X and then changes anywhere from three to five times X they are not seen as failures but the expectation has been built that this will happen.

Some Questions.

1. How do we communicate effectively that our internal estimates are firm and that we are “aware” that there will be lower external bids and here is what the reasons are for that and what to expect without sounding like we are “vendor bashing”
2. How do we communicate that we can do a better job for a higher price to individuals who are all about efficiencies and will choose a lower price to fit a budget and its time table and then deal with the increases later?
3. Is there a way to do the right thing for the company here?
4. What is the right thing?
5. Has anyone else been faces with this challenge?
   

Class wrap-up to follow.

Richie