Management and the Technology Professional – B302

Case study answer 2

From carrying out a critical path analysis for the processes, as Supervising Engineer, I would know that the final test phase (Stage 6) is part of the critical path for this process, (along with stages 1, 2 and 4) and has no float associated that would allow for any delay. In fact, only stages 3 and 5 have the ability to start later in the process, as they depend on other critical and longer stages finishing before the next stage can begin.

The choices available to me would be

(1) To say nothing, and allow the process to continue, hoping that the tests that were missed do not impact the quiality of the product.
(2) Halt the process, inform the Supervising Engineers of the other stages of the process and agree a way forward.


In halting my final testing stage of the process, I know that I would be subjecting the overall project delivery date by several days, and repeating the testing stage would have further implications, such as possibly causing a chain reaction of delays for subsequent processes.

Had I been in that position, I would have halted the process. Despite the delays and cost, the most important factor is that the final testing phase establishes the detailed performance charecteristics of the semi-finished product. This being the case, if I did not rectify the oversight and allowed it to move forward as a 'one-off' error, should the final product be marked at a specific standard, and subsequently fail to meet that standard, the whole fabrication process could be called into question. The shipping of poor quality / failed products would also have further impacts of lowering market/ brand confidence, increase the RMA rate of faulty goods and damage the company's reputation as a whole.

Procedures would also need to be discussed, agreed and put in place to ensure that this does not happen again, and that problems are not repeated.