Decision-Making Framework for Project Portfolio Planning article review Student’s name Institutional affiliation Date Decision-Making Framework for Project Portfolio Planning article review Introduction “A Decision-Making Framework for Project Portfolio Planning at Intel Corporation” is a research paper for a study carried by Siddhartha Sampath Esma Gel John Fowler and Karl with an aim of coming up a with a suitable tool to help in making decisions of the best project portfolio among alternatives. This was published as a journal in the year 2015. Choosing the best portfolio to pursue in order to provide products is a bit complicated and a difficult choice to make. Projects produce goods and services which consequently give returns to the company from the sales in the market. Every company requires planning well in order to obtain much gain from the portfolio chosen under strict budget and headcount constraints. In this study we need to elaborate of the tool as an aid to decision making framework for project portfolio planning. This developments and research will improve the effectiveness in decision making process in various companies with unique requirements. Summary of key learning The authors have made it clear that decision making in the Intel Company is complex due to the strict budgets and headcount constraints. Moreover with the increased number of alternatives under limited funding it has been difficulty for the management to select the best portfolio to pursue. Therefore the management has to carry out comparisons to evaluate the efficient project. The Voyager decision making aid tool has been effective as it outlines that the exchanges between business analytical reviews and cognitive have significant influence in solving the company problems. References Sampath S. Gel E. S. Fowler J. W. & Kempf K. G. (2015). A Decision-Making Framework for Project Portfolio Planning at Intel Corporation. Interfaces 45(5) 391-408. doi:10.1287/inte.2015.0809 [...]
Paper Report Cover page with name of the article, authors, and Interfaces issue number and date. Also show the names of people in your group. Introduction: Provide a short introduction to the paper. Do not summarize or copy the abstract. Problem and Context: What is the problem that the authors address? Is it a common problem? Who’s facing the problem? Why is it important? Analysis and Approach: Describe the analytical approach: Math programming, queueing theory, etc. or a combination, or something else. What was the objective in the solution (maximize profit, minimize idle time, etc.)? What were the constraints or limitations? Factors under their control, beyond their control? Were they trying to find the optimal values of something? Explain these without use of equations and in your own words. What challenges did the authors face? Results: What was the output of the authors’ approach? A model or formula? A new method or process for doing things? A decision support system? New piece of software or an app? Was it simply advice to the organization? Implementation: Did the organization test the solution? Did they implement the solution? Was the test and/or implementation successful? What was the short-term impact? Long-term impact? If numerical results of the implementation are provided, mention them. Shortcomings or limitations: What were the shortcomings of the study that the authors describe? Next Steps: What do the authors propose to do next? Is there a follow-up study? Summary of key learnings: What did you learn about the problem from this paper? Length of report: No more than 4-single spaced pages, excluding: cover page, any figures, flow charts, or diagrams, or attachments. Attachments: You can attach figures, flow charts etc., from the paper, but you must discuss them in your report. If you don’t plan to discuss them, don’t attach them. Important! The report must be in your own words. Simply borrowing sections from the paper is plagiarism and will be penalized.