remainder of the implementation to a colleague, Jack Scarso. A formal and structured handoff between the two change specialists is not occur. After one month and a half, Cantera was contacted by FC management and was told that his solution had failed. His colleague had abandoned the project without follow-through at the end of his internship and Cantera now has two weeks to right the ship. The system is underutilized when Blake returns. End user buy-in remains low and change process management appears to have slipped between the cracks amongst the vendor the hotel, and the consultants. The software, hailed as a panacea to the organization’s management structure, appears to be a waste of funds and to have possibly damaged the relationship between consulting firm and client.
The amount of relevant information available in this case is scarce. The problems though are very clear, FC did not facilitate the consulting change very well and needs to re-evaluate its policy of sending out student interns without direction or support. They also might want to consider a system where professional consultants followup on intern work at the end of the project. RH management did not incentivize use of the new system, consider the applicability of the intern’s new age solution to it’s established organization, or market it to internal employees as a solution to existing issues. In addition, the consultant himself (Cantera) is inexperienced, may have overpromised on the effectiveness of the software without participant buy-in (or interviewing lower-level employees), and was a poor communicator during the change of the guard