Sign #5: Large changes to project requirements and scope
Beware of the “Driver Performance” initiative that turns into the “Vehicle Maintenance” project. The reward of having a robust requirements list and involvement of stakeholders comes at the risk of your project core ROI being hijacked. It also runs the risk of requirements becoming so large and broad that the technology is unavailable to satisfy – so the project goes nowhere waiting endlessly for the all inclusive technology that may someday become available. Meanwhile, real value – the largest ROI, potentially – is left languishing in hope of future technical advances.
The most prevalent of this example is projects that start from the premise of providing ROI based on fuel and risk savings through driver feedback and coaching that turn into initiatives that require predictive maintenance based on diagnostic fault code data. There have been very few initiatives that have shown positive ROI from interrogating vehicle diagnostic data to improve preventive maintenance. There are many initiatives that have been derailed as the issues of vehicle data standards across year/makes/models, integration of diagnostic data with insourced (or outsourced) maintenance services, and OEM warranty impacts – confuse the initiative and grind otherwise successful projects to a halt. Years of lost savings from fuel and risk reductions alone are wasted at the expense of solving the complexities of the motor company products and data.