Introduction
A project is a central and significant element in the business world. When an organization wants to introduce a new product, address an organizational issue, or implement an intervention to boost performance, it needs an appropriate project. This term refers to a set of activities and actions required to achieve a specific outcome.
That is why each project consists of individual steps that should be performed to reach the stipulated goal. These steps also establish specific criteria for determining whether a particular initiative is successful or unsuccessful. Thus, the current assignment examines Juicero and its unsuccessful attempt to sell a $700 juicing machine, demonstrating that the project can be evaluated based on poor market research and validation.
Background
Business
Juicero was a successful startup company that prospered and closed in the 2010s. It grew because it benefited from the opportunities available to businesses and entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley. Its founder, Doug Evans, had a positive experience in the sphere of healthy drinks because his chain of cold-pressed juice bars allowed him to earn a fortune (Juetten, 2017, para. 3). Evans declared himself Steve Jobs in the area of juicing because he always looked for perfection and hired expensive industrial designers (Waters, 2021, para. 3). However, this strategy was not effective, and the company shut down in 2017.
Project
Evans decided to utilize his experience to launch a startup project and generate substantial profits. This initiative concerns a juice machine that could be connected to Wi-Fi. The company believed that many people valued healthy, natural drinks. These customers were expected to purchase this innovative gadget, despite its high price of $700 (Waters, 2021, para. 1). Users should have bought packets of pre-juiced vegetables and fruits and placed them in the machine to have it squeeze them (Juetten, 2018, para. 3).
Then, the organization created an effective presentation and targeted investors. This step was very successful because Juicero managed to receive money from Google Ventures, Kleiner Perkins, and other companies to raise $120 million in venture capital (Waters, 2021, para. 1). When the product entered the market and faced low demand, Juicero decided to decrease the price to $499, but this step did not help (Waters, 2021, para. 4). Consequently, the organization suffered significant losses. One can firmly state that the juicing machine project failed. It is reasonable to conduct further research to identify the specific reason for this collapse.
Analysis
When evaluating a project, the first step is to define specific criteria that will guide the process. Project management is a popular topic in the research field, as evidenced by numerous credible studies and articles. Hence, the most significant task is to identify the most suitable sources and analyze the evidence they provide. The following section presents the synthesized information on the standard criteria for project evaluation.
Identification of the Project Evaluation Criteria
Project management is a complex and comprehensive process comprising numerous smaller tasks and activities. According to Sadia et al. (2021, p. 86), market analysis is the first step in project management. This task requires an organization or individual to research and identify a specific need, and then forecast potential future demand for a product or service. The obtained information will demonstrate whether a particular project is reasonable.
Regardless of the project implemented and its sphere, it can be assessed based on standard criteria. According to van der Westhuizen and Fitzgerald (2005, p. 2), these factors include cost, time, and quality. First, every initiative has a particular budget, and it is significant to stay within this financial limit. If a stipulated goal is achieved without exceeding the budget, a project can be deemed successful.
Second, it is significant to complete a project by the specified deadline. Since multiple external and internal processes can impact the completion date, the project management team should strive to minimize the potential impact of these issues. Third, every project aims to produce a specific outcome, whether a product or a service. In any case, these results should be of decent quality to ensure recipients receive some benefits.
Additionally, several other criteria can be applied in this context. For example, Baccarini and Collins (2003) stipulate that project success depends on many factors. For example, they include project understanding, client involvement, project planning, communication, project control, and many other activities (Baccarini & Collins, 2003, p. 5). This information demonstrates that responsible individuals should manage multiple processes and phenomena to achieve positive outcomes.
Steinfort and Walker (2007) agree with this suggestion and simultaneously note that a project comprises several individual steps and activities. Thus, an initiative can only be successful if a project is appropriately planned and the organization has sufficient resources (Steinfort & Walker, 2007, p. 5). The latter requirement also applies to people and financing, as these two categories represent the most significant resources.
More specific attention should be paid to various stakeholder groups, as some stakeholders implement initiatives to provide others with advantages or opportunities. Steinfort and Walker (2007, p. 5) note that understanding key stakeholders is a significant factor in determining the success or failure of the entire project. In addition, Davis (2014, p. 189) explains that there are three stakeholder types: “senior management, project core team, and project recipient stakeholder group.”
It is possible to reach any of the three to determine what they think of the project and whether they consider it a success or a failure. Davis (2014, p. 189) also notes that it is typical for these groups to disagree over their perceptions of successful outcomes. In other words, the senior team may consider a particular result successful, while it will be dissatisfactory to the project recipients.
One can further state that two categories of criteria can be used to evaluate a project. On the one hand, it is reasonable to focus on a project’s product because it should be of high quality and address a particular market need (van der Westhuizen & Fitzgerald, 2005, p. 2). On the other hand, management success is another critical factor that deserves attention (van der Westhuizen & Fitzgerald, 2005, p. 2). This issue concerns whether the project management team has effectively completed all the necessary steps.
In conclusion, there are multiple criteria to evaluate a project. Evidence from scientific sources demonstrates that various processes or phenomena can determine whether an initiative is successful. It is impossible to say that any one criterion is more important than the others, which means that an issue at one stage can lead to the failure of an entire project. That is why it is necessary to conduct a comprehensive analysis to evaluate an initiative.
Evaluation of the Project Against Criteria
It is reasonable to evaluate the Juicero project against the identified criteria to identify specific aspects or issues that contributed to its failure. However, the first step is to comment on the factors that were completed when the juicing machine was presented to the market. The cost, time, and quality requirements were met because the device was effectively designed and became available to customers without any deadline extensions.
Simultaneously, the organization raised $120 million, which was sufficient to create the product. Furthermore, there were no claims or scandals about the juicing machines being of poor quality. This information demonstrates that the organization had a solid understanding of the project. Since Juicero achieved management success, it is even more exciting to discover why the project failed.
The organization conducted a market analysis that found a significant number of people were seeking healthy diet options. That is why the juicing machine, offering high-quality drinks, was considered a necessary product. However, it is now evident that this step was the weakest point in the entire project implementation process. Although the organization identified the existing trend, it failed to predict whether potential customers would be ready to buy such an expensive device.
Thus, the given project was not successful because the organization did not perform proper market research and validation (Waters, 2021, para. 10). Furthermore, Juicero did not ensure that its product provided customers with added value because it was not clear why it was necessary to buy the machine if the packets could be squeezed by hand. That is why it was impossible to connect the device with increased user satisfaction.
Conclusion
This assignment has demonstrated that project management is a comprehensive and significant approach that encompasses multiple processes and steps. If an organization wants to implement a specific initiative, it should take several steps to manage it effectively. These activities include market research, project planning, stakeholder identification, product or service development, project implementation, and other steps. Each of them is significant and can determine whether a project succeeds or fails.
Since one can better understand theoretical principles through real-life examples, the assignment focused on the Juicero’s unsuccessful project to sell a $700 juicing machine. On the one hand, the initiative involved several efficient steps, as the organization analyzed stakeholders, planned the project, and fully met the cost, time, and quality requirements. On the other hand, the market research and validation were insufficient because the organization failed to predict that customers would not be ready to purchase such an expensive device. Furthermore, the juicing machine was not popular among potential buyers since it did not offer added value.
Recommendations
Since the leading inefficiencies have been identified, it is possible to offer recommendations for rerunning the project properly. Remarkably, the $120 million project failed due to a single factor. Since the organization did not invest sufficient time and effort in market research, it was unable to accurately predict the product’s actual demand. Furthermore, the business failed to foresee that its device would not be requested because it lacked added value for customers.
Thus, if the project is rerun in the future, the organization should pay more attention to market research. If this process is properly followed, the business will recognize that the project is not feasible due to poor demand. This finding demonstrates that market research is among the most important steps in project management, as it can reveal that implementing the selected initiative is not reasonable. That is why organizations should not overlook this step if they want to deliver successful projects.
References
Baccarini, D. and Collins, A. (2003) ‘Critical success factors for projects’, Proceedings of the 17th ANZAM Conference, pp. 1-10.
Davis, K. (2014) ‘Different stakeholder groups and their perceptions of project success’, International Journal of Project Management, 32(2), pp. 189-201.
Juetten, M. (2018) Failed startups: Juicero. Forbes.
Sadia, F. et al. (2021) ‘A new process model of incremental asset building for software project management’, 2021 IEEE/ACIS 19th International Conference on Software Engineering Research, Management and Applications (SERA), pp. 86-90.
Steinfort, P. and Walker, D. (2007) ‘Critical success factors in project management globally and how they may be applied to aid projects’, Proceedings of the PMOZ Achieving Excellence-4th Annual Project Management Australia Conference, pp. 1-13.
Van der Westhuizen, D. and Fitzgerald, E. P. (2005) ‘Defining and measuring project success’, Proceedings of the European Conference on IS Management, Leadership, and Governance, pp. 157-163.
Waters, B. (2021) Juicero: a story of startup failure. Medium.