Denver Airport Essay

1668 Words4 Pages

Overview
The Denver International Airport project started with a plan to route passenger’s bags to and from aircraft without significant human involvement. The airport turnaround time was to be reduced to as little as 30 minutes by automating baggage handling (Neufville, 1994).
Management approached BAE; to enlarge the United Airlines baggage handling system into an integrated system handling all 3 concourses, all airlines, arriving and departing. A faster turnaround meant more effective operations. Although the plan had good aims, it rapidly dissolved as underestimation of the project’s complexity resulted in cumulative problems (Calleam Consulting Ltd, 2008).
The system was reduced from 3 concourses to 1. When it was tested, bags were crushed, …show more content…

But once the work commenced Denver officials often altered plans and timetables without checking with either the airlines or BAE. However, when alterations were made to one part of the system, it was not clearly understood how the changes would affect the system as a whole.
As the project matured, it grew in size and complexity, design changes increased the systems technical difficulty that constantly hindered progress. The major changes in the project warranted review of other systems however due to the condensed development and testing schedule, they were treated with minor patchwork (Calleam Consulting Ltd, 2008).
Lack of communication management
There was lack of effective communication between vendors, the project team and consultants. This is evident through issues such as vendors blocking roadways for other vendors and the city cancelling orders for electricity filters which were a critical part of the project. This led to the filters arriving later than planned and the automatic baggage handling system being forced to fit in the configuration of the already constructed airport (Calleam Consulting Ltd, …show more content…

In the Denver International Airport case, BAE committed to deliver the whole system under a fixed scope, schedule and budget arrangement. The decision to give a firm commitment to scope, schedule and budget transferred substantial risk onto BAE. This move suggests that those in the highest level of BAE’s management structure had failed to identify the level of risk they were entering into. If they were more aware, they would have taken necessary steps to reduce the risk and found ways to limit the scope to an outcome that was more attainable in the time presented (Calleam Consulting Ltd, 2008).
Inadequate time
The airport project management team and BAE decided to continue with the full-scale project although there were clear signs that there was inadequate time left for the project to be accomplished successfully. BAE officials stated that the timetable for the opening of the airport was never realistic and should have taken potential complications into account. As the project fell more and more behind schedule, human error became an issue due to a more condensed training and testing period (Calleam Consulting Ltd, 2008).
The tight schedule could not allow the system to be effectively tested; poor procurement management system that overlooked the bids of professionals who specified that the baggage system could not be completed within the project duration i.e. 2

Open Document