Problems Resulting from Poor Implementation
The innovative system installed in the bars of the Alvalade XX1 failed on the day of inauguration. Specifically, the Cartao 21, which is a payment system, failed to detect the payment cards. Besides, the cards were not activated at the POSs by the bartenders because they were overwhelmed by the number of customers demanding services. This means that the cards were not activated at the point of purchase and the system could not accept cash payment.
This is because the cash drawer was not properly configured to open for manual cash payment alternative. The bartenders were not furnished with the necessary codes and only two staff members were available to reconfigure all the forty-two POSs spread across the big stadium. In instances where the POSs were properly reconfigured to allow the alternative manual cash payment, the system failed to perform its function because prices of some items had not been fed into the database. Also, it took relatively a long time to complete a single transaction because the cycle time per transaction was 45 seconds. The wireless terminals also failed to work as anticipated.
Key Roots of Failure
The first challenge is the lack of pre-testing of the system before the day of inauguration. If the team had done this, they would have noticed the shortcomings and made appropriate adjustments. Besides, the bartenders were not subjected to prior training on how to handle the system, what codes to use, and how to address possible challenges that come with the use of the e-payment software. The last key root cause of the problem is the failure by the system provider to give a backup plan or staff to facilitate implementation and follow up.
Root Causes that can be addressed with Proper Risk Management Plan
The failure to train employees on the dynamics and operation of the system before integration can be addressed through proper risk management since the plan would highlight the significance of project implementer training, as part of the project administration. This aspect would have minimized the risk of failure as a result of an imbalance between the system and the necessary skills needed for successful execution.
Besides, the failure by the system provider to give a backup plan or staff to facilitate implementation and follow up could be addressed by a proper project risk management plan. If there was a good plan in place to manage possible risks, the project implementation agencies would have highlighted the need for follow up and active involvement in project implementation, since the event occurred when the project was still underway. The project can only be handed over after testing and actual inauguration. Therefore, a proper risk management plan would have anticipated such occurrences and created strategies for addressing them before they occur. In the above case, the project administration, especially in terms of risk management, was very poor.
Suggested Risk Management Plan
In the implementation of the e-payment system at Casa XX1, the risk management plan should include the aspect of the provision of alternative B in the event of failure of alternative A. In this case, the configuration of codes to allow manual payment as an alternative to e-payment ought to have been well planned, tested, and integrated in the current skill levels of the bartenders. This strategy would have given room for continuous training and system functioning internalization by the bartenders.