Ben Shepherd
TMA No: 3
Part 1




Contents 3
Background 3
MKTram Organisation: The Options. 3
Recommnedations 6
Putting it into Action 6


      After review of the SEMP that was submitted to Milton Keynes council, concerns have been raised by them regarding the organizational structure that we proposed to manage the development and delivery of the MKTram system. As you will be aware we had proposed that each member of the consortia would work on there respective project independently. However, MK Council believes, and with some justification, that due to the integrated nature of the programme it requires a more cohesive and integrated model of organization if the system to be delivered are to integrate seamlessly and quality to be upheld.   This raises issues as currently there are no joint organizational structures that exist which we can utilize to better integrate the work of our respective organizations.   The council us to address these valid concerns and institute a structure that will support ability to integrate the different system effectively with consortia wide review, control and management of the interfaces between systems and deliverables.

      They also raise the need for a common approach throughout the consortia to reporting on risk, cost, schedule and logistics, as well of the auditing of compliance thought the organization to the relevant legislation and quality.

      In addition to this they would like their Infrastructure planning department to be involved in the programme level in important technical and management decisions concerning design and system implementation. This is not possible with the current structure as there is no central team which has as programme wide remit and scope.

      Theses concerns are valid and if we are to proceed we need to design an organizational structure that will be able to deliver theses results. It is therefore...