A key project team member had an accident and will be in the hospital for at least two months. The backlog items the team member was working on have been delayed since the team member was the only person who knew how to complete them.
What could the project manager have done to avoid this situation?
To avoid the situation where a key team member's absence causes delays, the project manager should have developed a knowledge transfer plan. This plan would ensure that crucial knowledge and skills are documented and shared among multiple team members, thereby reducing dependency on any one individual. By distributing the expertise throughout the team, the project remains resilient to unforeseen absences, ensuring continuity and minimizing the risk of delays.
In project management, it's crucial to identify potential risks and develop a risk response plan to address them. In this scenario, identifying the risk of a key team member being unavailable due to unforeseen circumstances (such as an accident) and developing a risk response plan could have included actions like cross-training team members, creating documentation for critical tasks, or having contingency plans in place. This would help mitigate the impact of losing a key resource and reduce the risk of delays when such situations occur.
If there is a risk response plan available, it is always the first choice.
handover knowldege to others to reduce risk
"since the team member was the only person who knew how to complete them" so this should know known risk from the begining as he is the only one in the team so i vote for A
C is the answer. To mitigate the risk of project delays due to the unexpected absence of a key team member, the project manager could have implemented a proactive strategy, such as developing a knowledge transfer plan (Option C). This approach involves systematically sharing critical knowledge and skills among team members, ensuring that expertise is not concentrated in the hands of a single individual. By fostering a culture of collaboration and knowledge exchange, the team becomes more resilient to unforeseen events, such as accidents or sudden unavailability of a team member
As the others commented, C is the only feasible option: continious knowledge sharing ensures that we arent dependent on a single resource.
Developing a knowledge transfer plan ensures that critical knowledge and skills are shared among team members, reducing dependency on any single individual and preventing delays caused by the absence of a key team member.
C. Developed a knowledge transfer plan
C seems to be the best choice
The accident is unknown/unknown; therefore, A is not a good option. C is a better choice.
For people choosing C, how come a person in hospital can share his knowledge to his team members? A is the right answer
the question is ... have done to avoid, not will do.
C. Developed a knowledge transfer plan Explanation: Developing a knowledge transfer plan ensures that critical knowledge and skills are shared among multiple team members, preventing delays if a key team member is unavailable. This approach enhances team resilience and continuity.
C is incorrect. In this situation, need a knowledge sharing plan, not knowledge transfer. Knowledge transfer meeting is to tranfer knowledge from development team to operating team
A: The risk should have been identified (not necessarily as an accident but as an absence/resignation e.t.c) and the response plan could be knowledge transfer.