Selling Executives on Project Management: A Case Study
This case study examines Levon Corporation's resistance to implementing project management despite declining revenues and employee recommendations. The paper analyzes why executives were more receptive to an external consultant than internal employees, explores reasons for their continued apprehension, and proposes persuasion strategies the consultant could have employed. Key findings highlight the importance of objective expertise, comparative performance data, and demonstrable implementation pathways in overcoming organizational change resistance.
- Overview and Context: Levon Corporation's revenue decline and project management implementation struggle
- The Consultant Advantage: Why executives listened to external consultants over internal employees
- Executive Apprehension and Persuasion Gap: Why the consultant failed to convince executives despite demonstrating need
- Recommended Persuasion Strategies: Evidence-based tactics for gaining executive support and buy-in
- Conclusion: Summary of persuasion approach and implementation feasibility
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Directly addresses the human and organizational dynamics behind resistance to change, moving beyond surface-level explanations to examine power dynamics and decision-making psychology.
- Applies critical analysis to evaluate the consultant's approach, identifying specific tactical failures (creating disconnect, focusing on criticism rather than solutions) that weakened persuasion effectiveness.
- Grounds recommendations in concrete, actionable strategies (comparative performance data, hypothetical financial projections, real implementation examples) rather than vague prescriptions.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper employs case-based analytical reasoning to move from observation to diagnosis to solution. It first identifies a puzzling organizational behavior (executives accepting consultant advice but rejecting employee input), then constructs evidence-based explanations using cited sources, and finally prescribes targeted interventions with clear justification. This approach demonstrates critical problem-solving in organizational contexts.
Structure breakdown
The paper follows a diagnostic structure: (1) present the case facts and primary puzzle, (2) explain why consultants gain credibility over employees, (3) identify why the consultant still failed despite this advantage, (4) propose specific, evidence-backed strategies the consultant should have used. This progression moves logically from context to root cause analysis to actionable recommendations, mirroring a consultant's own diagnostic methodology.
Overview and Context
Levon Corporation's executives were concerned about the company's declining revenues. The company's employees argued that the decline in revenues was due to changing industry trends. Contracts were increasingly being awarded on the basis of points rather than the lowest bidder mechanism. Since the company had no project management capability, it kept missing out on key contracts, which affected its revenue stream. The employees suggested that the project management function be incorporated into the business framework to increase the company's competitiveness.
The executives, however, were reluctant to consider this proposal because they believed such a move would disrupt the organization's balance of power. They reluctantly hired a project management consultant to evaluate the employees' suggestion. Even after the consultant openly demonstrated that the organization was in dire need of a project management department, the executives remained apprehensive about proceeding with implementation.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.