Introduction
The main objective of a company is to make profits. Profitability enables the company to, maintain its organizational structure as well as cover more markets (Stone, 2015). Nevertheless, the stakeholders are the decision makers of the company and it is their mandate to ensure that the company aligns with its code of ethics during its operations (Bourne, 2009).
Nevertheless, in any business venture, the company has to have goals, strategies, and objectives (Alexander, 2017). As a matter of fact, the strategic objectives form the core of the strategic plan (Joseph, 2017). The strategic objectives are the eventual goals that the company wishes to achieve. They form the core of the strategic plan (Belicove, 2013). As such, the goals are the primary objectives (Vayva, et al., 2012), strategy refers to the approach and the objective is a quantifiable measure taken towards the strategy (Carroll & Buchholtz, 2014). Some of these are evident in DeGrandis Sporting Goods business projects.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Project A: DeGrandis Running Shoes
As stated in the company portfolio, the main objective of the organization is to double the sales from the private label products. This can only be achieved by ensuring that there is a strong network of Chinese producers, the quality of the goods is impeccable and sales are improved within three years. In essence, this first project is in line with the strategies of increasing the sales, as is indicated
On the other hand, the company’s code of standards are the principles that govern the methodology used in securing the purchase and sales of commodities (PMI, 2013). This has been violated by engaging with suppliers who use child labor.The use of child labor is against has been prohibited all over the world (Lombardo, n.d.).
As with the PPS, some of the faults can be attributed to the fact that there were no proper measures to ensure that the suppliers complied with the company’s ethical standards (Buysse & Verbeke, 2003). This can be attributed to reluctance by the stakeholders and the project process (Eskerod & Huemann, 2013). However, factors such as quality, benefit, innovation and learning, and use were highly maintained considering the customer satisfaction levels (Eskerod & Jepsen, 2013).
Nevertheless, the project was able to achieve its objectives although it violated the code of ethics. Therefore, it is recommended that the company considers another supplier. Moreover, proper consultation should be considered prior to actual project implementation and there should be an increase in the number of suppliers to boost sales.
 
 
Project B: Australian Olympic Committee (AOC) Partnership
In this case, the project was in line with the strategy of securing the partnership. Although there were delays, the partnership resulted in over $ 3million sales. However, the incidence of bribing to secure the partnership was not in line with the company’s ethics.
As with the PPS, the stakeholders were highly efficient, except for the sponsor involved in bribing. On the other hand, the project process was successful although it cannot be fully assessed because of the bribing. Moreover, innovation and learning are simply discredited by the same instance of cheating. Nevertheless, the quality, benefit, and use have been attained through quality production.
In essence, the instance of bribing ruined the whole deal. Although it resulted in a successful project, it also resulted in a wrong impression of the organization structure (Alie, 2015) and as such, had to be called off. In essence, the company should focus on repairing the image as well as implementing ways to deal with corrupt officials.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Project C: Ladybird Sporting Apparel
In this instance, the company did not align the project with the strategies as well as the ethics. Strategies were focused on environmental conservation and quality production which were not achieved. On the other hand, the ethics were violated since there was no proper testing of the products prior to release into the market.
As with the quality, the use and benefit of the product, the lower ratings are attributed to the fact that the product was a failure in the market. The project process and stakeholders were at fault since they did not consider the repercussions of improper testing (Aaltonen, 2011). Nevertheless, the production process was slightly successful since the time and cost constraints were achieved. The only problem was the testing.
In essence, the project was a complete failure, the ethics were not adhered to and the whole project team was at fault. Therefore, the company should overhaul the whole testing process and select a new supplier. Moreover, there should be an improvement in the stakeholder participation (Kerzner & Kerzner, 2017) in such projects.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

References

Aaltonen, k., 2011. Project stakeholder analysis as an environmental interpretation process. International journal of project management.
Alexander, M., 2017. How to pick the best project management methodology for success. [Online]
Available at: https://www.cio.com/article/2950579/methodology-frameworks/how-to-pick-a-project-management-methodology.html
Alie, S. S., 2015. Project governance: #1 critical success factor. North America, Orlando, FL, Project Management Institute.
Belicove, M. E., 2013. Understanding Goals, Strategy, Objectives, and tactics in the Age of Social. [Online]
Available at: www.forbes.com/sites/mikalbelicove/2013/09/27/Understanding-Goals-Strategy-Objectives-and-tactics-in-the-Age-of-Social/
[Accessed 03 10 2018].
Bourne, L., 2009. Success and stakeholders. [Online]
Available at: https://mosaicprojects.wordpress.com/2009/01/09/success-andstakeholders
Buysse, K. & Verbeke, A., 2003. Proactive environmental strategies:A stakeholder management perspective. strategic management journal.
Carroll, A. & Buchholtz, A., 2014. Business and society:ethics,sustainability, and stakeholder management. s.l.:s.n.
Eskerod, P. & Huemann, m., 2013. Sustainable development and project stakeholder management:What standards say. International;l journal of management.
Eskerod, P. & Jepsen, A. L., 2013. project stakeholder management. s.l.:s.n.
Joseph, C., 2017. factors that may cause a change in an organization. Small business.
Kerzner, H. & Kerzner, H. R., 2017. Project management: a systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling. s.l.:s.n.
Lombardo, J., n.d. Factors that cause a change in an organization:planned and unplanned. [Online]
Available at: study.com/academy/lesson/factors-that-cause-change-in-organisation-planned-and-unplanned.html
[Accessed 17 August 2017].
PMI, 2013. A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMI BoK Guide). 5 ed. Pennsylvania, USA: s.n.
Stone, M., 2015. Progress payments:keeping a positive cash flow. [Online]
Available at: www.markupandprofit.com/newsletter/Progress payments:keeping a positive cash flow
Vaya, O., Goksoy, A. & Ozsoy, B., 2012. Business Process Reengineering: Strategic Tool for Managing Organizational Change an Application in a Multinational Company. International Journal of business management.