Many of the assumptions were revealed to be flawed, such as the assumption that an ideal model existed in the corporate world. There was little congruence between the new project and the organization's prior mandate, therefore the project represented a shift in CIS' mandate.
4) the keys to success for the project were identified as: meeting needs felt at lower levels; designed for and perceived as allowing improvement in job performance with the appropriate rewards; be inspired by best practices and fit into the organization's culture and mandate; and be "owned" by the people who would run and use it. Other factors that would influence success include the communication process, especially as the internal team would transmit feedback to the external team; setting more clear definitions for the terminology and objectives; and the ability of management to transition the project's perception from being a power...
Strong communication was made to the entire organization with respect to the project's value. Line personnel, not the teams, would do the bulk of the work. This approach still has some potential problems, however. Management risks losing a degree of control over the project if different teams work on small projects. Coordination and communication become more difficult under this implementation strategy. While each mini-project has strict control, each mini-project also introduces the risk of scope management problems as the project grows larger with only limited directional focus. Measurement of success is also difficult - the goals are still somewhat vague and it is will be years before it is known if the project was a success.
