PART B
Dana Lasket was the PM of a project with the objective of determining the feasibility of moving
a significant portion of Gerkin’s computing capacity to another geographical location. Project
completion was scheduled for 28 weeks. Dana had the project team motivated, and at the end
of the twentieth week, the project was on schedule.
The next week, during a casual lunch conversation, Dana discovered that the vice-president of
finance had serious doubts about the validity of the assumptions the team was using to decide
which computers should be relocated.
Dana tried to convince him that he was wrong during two follow-up meetings, with no success.
In fact, the more they talked, the more convinced the vice-president became that Dana was
wrong. The project was too far along to change any assumptions without causing significant
delays. In addition, the vice-president was likely to inherit the responsibility for implementing
any approved plans for the new location. For those reasons, Dana felt it was essential to
resolve the disagreement before the scheduled completion of the project. Dana requested a
project auditor be assigned to audit the project, paying special attention to the assumptions
made to identify the computers to be moved.
Discussion Question: What alternative to an audit can Dana Lasket offer to the VP of Finance?