Southwestern’s football expansion

    The case background Southwestern University (SWU), a large state college in Stephenville, Texas, 30 miles southwest of the Dallas/Fort Worth metroplex, enrolls close to 20,000 students. In a typical town–gown relationship, the school is a dominant force in the small city, with more students during fall and spring than permanent residents. A longtime football powerhouse, SWU is a member of the Big Eleven conference and is usually in the top 20 in college football rankings. To bolster its chances of reaching the elusive and long desired number-one ranking, in 2006, SWU hired the legendary Phil Flamm as its head coach. One of Flamm’s demands on joining SWU had been a new stadium. With attendance increasing, SWU administrators began to face the issue head-on. After 6 months of study, much political arm wrestling, and some serious financial analysis, Dr. Joel Wisner, president of Southwestern University, had reached a decision to expand the capacity at its on-campus stadium. Adding thousands of seats, including dozens of luxury skyboxes, would not please everyone. The influential Flamm had argued the need for a first-class stadium, one with built-in dormitory rooms for his players and a palatial office appropriate for the coach of a future NCAA champion team. But the decision was made, and everyone, including the coach, would learn to live with it.The job now was to get construction going immediately after the 2012 season ended. This would allow exactly 270 days until the 2013 season opening game. The contractor, Hill Construction (Bob Hill being an alumnus, of course), signed his contract. Bob Hill looked at the tasks his engineers had outlined and looked President Wisner in the eye. “I guarantee the team will be able to take the field on schedule next year,” he said with a sense of confidence. “I sure hope so,” replied Wisner. “The contract penalty of $10,000 per day for running late is nothing compared to what Coach Flamm will do to you if our opening game with Penn State is delayed or canceled.” Hill, sweating slightly, did not need to respond. In football-crazy Texas, Hill Construction would be mud if the 270-day target was missed. Back in his office, Hill again reviewed the data and noted that optimistic time estimates can be used as crash times. Crash time duration can also be used as task duration on critical chain.   Table 1: Southwestern' s project ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION TIME ESTIMATES WAYS) FRED/0550E4M OPTIMISTIC MOST ux MY PESSIMISTIC CRASH COSTIDAY COST A 13crodng. 'meant., tax structuring 20 30 40 51,500 51,500 B Foundatmo concrete Mauro lot boxes A 20 65 80 3,500 4000.003 C 0:graIng sista' stadum seatmg A SO 60 loo 4,000 2300,000 thstirodng walkways. stanvells, elestors 30 50 100 1,900 1,900000 E Intend swring, lathes B 25 30 35 9,500 600.000 Inspesion approvals 0.1 0.1 0.1 0 2.000 Flumbing D, F 25 30 35 2.500 500,000 H Panting 10 20 30 2,000 900,000 Flarttare/AGInetal wading, 20 25 60 2,000 2.000 111e/carpetAs4doves 8 10 12 6000 250,000 K Impaction 0.1 0.1 0.1 0 0 Fret &tad wododealuTt I, K 20 25 60 4500 60.000   • Prepare a critical chain and a critical path schedule for this project using Microsoft project or any other project management software.• What is the probability of finishing the project in 270 days?   • Discuss and evaluate the procurement of materials and services for this project. • What type of contract you recommend for procurements in this project and why? • Prepare a status report based on the following information:On day 95 tasks A, B, and D are completed and tasks C and E are 50% completed. Total cost so far is $412,525.Identify any deviation from the original project plan by using earned value Analysis. Discuss the implications of these variances in terms of schedules and costs and make your recommendations for future action. • You are asked to complete the project in the next 140 days what is the cost of this decision?