Captivia Conglomerate Case Study

910 Words4 Pages
Week 6 - Captiva Conglomerate MAJOR FACTS: A. Al Carpenter, Materials manager at Captiva Conglomerate, has called a meeting with his entire supply team about the S.O. Software (SOS), the developer/supplier of a custom inventory management and spare parts management system, to focus on the status of the contract, and a plan for corrective action. B. The team isn’t happy with the status so far, including Monica Stein, vice president of finance who believes the contract is a mess. The contract was not vetted through all the departments and the specifications were approved by only one department head, the IT Director. C. Sam Sliderule, Inventory and Spares Manager, is thoroughly unsatisfied with the initial tests of the system – calling them a “disaster” - and the system is 4 months behind schedule. Additionally, the regional and centralized inventory management system is 10 months late. D. Jana Perry, director of Information Technology, has also used the system and thinks it works well, however she has a M.S. in Information Technology which implies the system does function however it is not user friendly. Besides the company president, Jana is presumably the only other person who saw the specification prior to contract signature with SOS. E. The lack of understanding has caused the team to be four months behind schedule trying to figure out the software, and tens months behind schedule with the regional and centralized inventory management system. F. Gerry (Captiva’s president) negotiated the contract with SOS, calling out “best efforts” and “whenever possible” thereby potentially limiting legal recourse Captiva may have. The specifications appear to have been drafted by SOS G. SOS used $1 million allocated for the contract and had seventeen unpriced change orders pending. MAJOR PROBLEMS: A. The president of

More about Captivia Conglomerate Case Study

Open Document