7.3: What You Will Submit and Memo Sequence

 

📦 What Students Will Submit (Chapter 5 – Execution Phase)

For Chapter 5, you will simulate the role of the C-Bay Project Management Team during the execution of the NovaMed Software Project. Your job is to monitor vendor performance, analyze issues, and communicate professionally with WinSoft Systems.

You will submit the following items for assessment:

---

1. Eight Completed Action Plan Worksheets (One for Each Memo)

You will complete one Individual Action Plan & Communication Worksheet for each memo (Memos #1–#8).

Each worksheet includes two parts:

PART A – Internal Action Plan (Not Sent to WinSoft)

You will analyze the memo and document:

• The core issue

• Impacted project domains (schedule, cost, scope, quality, team, vendor compliance, reporting)

• References to the SOW, Contract, Reporting Guidelines, SRS, HLDD, or Weekly Status Report

• Your recommended next action

• Assumptions, risks, or constraints

PART B – Professional Communication (Sent to WinSoft or C-Bay Leadership)

You will write a formal email or memo that:

• Addresses the correct WinSoft team member(s)

• Uses a professional tone and structure

• Summarizes the issue

• Requests corrective action and sets deadlines

• References contractual or reporting obligations where appropriate

 

2. A Consolidated Progress Log (Optional but Encouraged)

A single-page document summarizing:

• Issue type encountered in each memo

• Your response focus

• Lessons learned week by week

• Patterns in vendor performance

This demonstrates growth and reflection across the execution timeline.

📁 Suggested file name:
CBay_ExecutionPhase_ProgressLog_YourName.docx

---

3. The Final Execution Reflection (Required)

At the end of the chapter, you will submit a short written reflection (½–1 page) analyzing:

• What you learned about project execution

• How you used artifacts (SOW, Contract, SRS, HLDD, Reporting Guidelines) to make decisions

• How Earned Value metrics influenced your actions

• What you would do differently as a project leader in a real-world environment

📁 File name:
CBay_ExecutionReflection_YourName.docx

---

 

---

📤 Final Submission Package

At the end of Chapter 5, you will upload a single folder containing:

✔ 8 Memo Worksheets

✔ Final Reflection

✔ Optional Progress Log

📁 Folder naming convention:
CBay_ExecutionPhase_YourName/

📬 Chapter 5 – Memo Sequence Overview (Weeks 1–6)

In this chapter, you will operate as the C-Bay Inc. internal project leadership team overseeing WinSoft Systems during the execution of the NovaMed Software development.

You will receive a sequence of eight memos, each simulating a real-world execution problem such as:

• Reporting failures

• Missed design milestones

• Earned Value performance drops

• Quality issues and defect spikes

• Unauthorized scope changes

• Staffing challenges

• Integration failures

• Multi-front cost/schedule crises

Each memo contains:

• A realistic email from a WinSoft team member

• Embedded issues or mistakes

• Missing or incorrect data

• Risks that must be identified

• References to SOW, Contract, SRS, HLDD, and Reporting Guidelines

Your job is to:

1. Read the memo carefully

Extract what the actual problem is (not just what is said).

2. Use the Action Plan Template

Fill out Part A (internal) + Part B (email/memo response).

3. Cite the correct documents

Contract clauses, SOW deadlines, reporting requirements, design dependencies, etc.

4. Recommend actions as a real PM

Your responses should sound like professional PMO correspondence.

The Memo SequenceBelow are the eight execution memos, each introduced with context and followed by the exact email content students will receive.

These memos appear in order throughout the milestone simulation.

Full simulation of execution-phase problems

This sequence is specifically crafted to:

• Touch ALL five control pillars (scope, schedule, cost, quality, team)

• Use all uploaded artifacts (SOW, Contract, SRS, HLDD, Reporting Guidelines, Status Templates, Resource List)

• Use Earned Value and Bulls-Eye data

• Build from simple → complex → multi-problem scenarios

You can respond to the memo in the following worksheet.

---

 

📬 MEMO #1 — Week 1, Day 2

Missing Status Report Deliverables (Early Red Flags)

From: Julie (WinSoft Project Manager)
To: C-Bay PM Team
Subject: Week 1 Status Report Submission

Hello Team,

Attached is our Week 1 Status Report. We have made initial progress on the NovaMed GUI components and have begun reviewing the SRS with our developers.

Please note that the Bulls-Eye chart is not included this week as we are still configuring our reporting environment. Also, Earned Value values (PV/EV/AC) will be populated starting next week when more work hours have been logged. We expect all reporting elements to be in place by Week 2.

Let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks, 
Julie
WinSoft Project Manager

Problems embedded for students:

• Missing mandatory Bulls-Eye (Contract + Reporting Guidelines)

• Missing EVM metrics (required starting Week 1)

• Status report late/partial

• No milestone alignment mentioned

• “Expect next week” violates SOW deadlines

---

📬 MEMO #2 — Week 2, Day 3

HLDD Delay (Architect Bottleneck)

From: Arnold (Software Architect)
To: C-Bay Systems Engineering
Cc: Julie, Tom
Subject: HLDD Status – Minor Delay

Hi Team,

I wanted to inform you that the High-Level Design Document (HLDD) will need an additional 3–4 days. We discovered a few inconsistencies in the database relationship diagrams and need to adjust our API routing logic to align with the backend authentication approach.

This should not significantly affect the broader schedule because development can begin in parallel.

I will send the updated HLDD by end of Week 2.

Regards,
Arnold
Software Architect, WinSoft

Problems embedded for students:

• HLDD delay directly impacts development start (false claim “development can begin in parallel”)

• SOW requires design completion before coding

• No risk analysis or revised plan provided

• Should have been escalated to PM (not directly to systems engineering)

---

📬 MEMO #3 — Week 3, Day 5

Cost Overrun Emerging (CPI Drop)

From: Julie (WinSoft PM)
To: C-Bay PM Team
Subject: Week 3 Status Report – Cost Update

Team,

Please find the Week 3 Status Report attached.

We logged more hours than expected this week due to onboarding a few new developers and resolving unexpected UI framework compatibility issues. Our Actual Cost (AC) is higher than planned, but we believe this will normalize next week once the new team members get ramped up.

We do not anticipate any milestone impact at this time.

Thanks,
Julie

Problems embedded for students:

• Early CPI drop (from EV < AC) with vague explanation

• AC higher but no clear cause analysis

• Onboarding hours should be planned, not “unexpected”

• Single-sentence dismissal of risks

• SOW requires deviation >20% to be explained

• PM denies milestone impact without evidence

---

📬 MEMO #4 — Week 4, Day 2

Quality Issues & Rising Defects

From: Catherine (QA Manager)
To: Julie, C-Bay QA
Subject: Defect Findings – Online Modules

Hi Everyone,

During our initial integration testing for the Online Product modules, we identified 27 defects, including:

• 6 critical issues related to Role Management

• 3 authentication failures

• 9 UI inconsistencies

• 5 missing validations

• 4 backend sync mismatches

We are working with the dev team to triage and fix these as quickly as possible. Given the volume, we may delay integration testing for a few days.

Regards,
Catherine

Problems embedded for students:

• High-severity issues affecting SRS compliance

• Delay required but not escalated

• No regression testing plan

• Cross-team coordination missing (no dev lead copied)

---

📬 MEMO #5 — Week 5, Day 1

Unauthorized Scope Change Request

From: James (Business Analyst)
To: C-Bay PM Team
Subject: Feature Suggestion – Task Templates

Hello,

During our requirements review, it occurred to us that adding a Task Template Feature would enhance NovaMed’s usability. Several healthcare clients we’ve worked with in the past have requested the ability to save and reuse standardized task templates.

We believe adding this functionality now would greatly benefit the product before Release 2.

Let me know your thoughts.
James
WinSoft BA

Problems embedded for students:

• Suggesting new feature mid-sprint

• Not in SOW or SRS

• Violates Contract: requires Change Request

• No impact assessment

• Trying to alter scope during critical window

---

📬 MEMO #6 — Week 5, Day 4

Staffing Issue – Key Developer Resigned

From: Julie
To: C-Bay PM Team
Subject: Developer Availability Update

Team,

Unfortunately, one of our mid-level developers, Bharathi, resigned unexpectedly and is no longer available effective immediately. We’re reallocating some work internally and hope this won’t affect the Release 2 timeline.

We will keep you posted.

Julie
Project Manager, WinSoft

Problems embedded for students:

• Violates Contract: must notify C-Bay within 5 days + provide replacement resume

• Immediate departure without transition plan

• Staffing risk not evaluated

• SOW deliverables at risk

• No mitigation strategy

---

📬 MEMO #7 — Week 6, Day 3

Integration Failure – Technical Breakdown

From: Tom (Technical Lead)
To: C-Bay Technical Lead
Cc: Arnold, QA, Julie
Subject: Integration Issues – Online Modules

Hi Team,

We attempted to integrate the Online Product modules today, but we are seeing:

• API routing mismatches

• Authentication errors across multiple endpoints

• Database schema inconsistencies with HLDD

• Controller methods missing required parameters

• Several broken event listeners

We are still assessing impact and will send a follow-up after the dev team meets.

Regards,
Tom
WinSoft Technical Lead

Problems embedded for students:

• Major integration failure (root cause: HLDD delay)

• Missing version alignment

• Broken CI processes

• No immediate remediation plan

• SOW Milestone 2 jeopardized

---

📬 MEMO #8 — Week 6, Day 5

Multi-Front Crisis – Cost + Schedule + Quality Failure

From: Julie
To: C-Bay PM Team, Director of Delivery
Subject: Week 6 Status Report – Summary

Team,

Attached is the Week 6 Status Report.

Key highlights:

• SPI = 0.68

• CPI = 0.71

• 45 open defects

• Integration testing halted

• Several modules behind schedule

• AC continues to rise due to additional testing hours

• Bulls-Eye Chart will be provided next week as we are consolidating data

We are doing our best to stabilize the build.

Julie

Problems embedded for students:

• Red SPI + CPI with no corrective action plan

• SPI < 0.7 indicates severe schedule slippage

• CPI < 0.75 indicates severe cost overrun

• Missing Bulls-Eye again (non-compliance)

• Defect backlog severe

• Testing halted = critical escalation

• No structured recovery plan

---

🎯 All 8 memos are now complete, realistic, and escalating.

They are ready to be inserted into:

• The Plan of Attack

• Student assignments

• Chapter 5 content

• Instructor guides

• Evaluation rubrics

If you want, I can now:

👉 Insert these into Chapter 5 – Plan of Attack Section
👉 Generate student-facing assignment sheets
👉 Create grading rubrics for each memo
👉 Build model answers for instructors
👉 Export all memos into a single PDF or Word file

Just tell me what you want next!