Given your assessment of the project complexity, clarity, and size, what management strategies would you recommend for it? What, if any, of these strategies were adopted in this project?Describe the development methodology that was applied to this project. Was this the most appropriate approach? Provide a rationale for your response.When a project is outsourced, who should manage the project—the internal group or the outsourcer? Why?Case Study 11‐2 Dealing with Traffic Jams in LondonAs London entered the 21st century, it confronted a major issue that plagues many cities throughout the world—excessive automobile traffic. Many Londoners—particularly the business community—rated traffic congestion as the city’s most serious problem. At peak periods, the average speed was less than 10 miles per hour, a slower speed than the horse‐drawn carriages of previous centuries. Drivers spent about half their time waiting in traffic. This congestion nightmare was not only a major source of driver frustration but also a contributor to both environmental and economic problems. By one estimate, traffic‐related problems cost London businesses roughly £2 million—more than $3 million—every week. Clearly, the city needed an aggressive policy to address this issue. The solution, proposed by the government study Road Charging Options for London (ROCOL) authorized by the 1999 Greater London Authority Act and endorsed by incoming mayor Ken Livingstone, was congestion charging. As the name suggests, the city would assess a fee, or charge, on every automobile that entered high‐traffic sections of London during peak hours.Rather than attempt a broad citywide implementation, the government focused specifically on the highly congested section of central London where roughly one million people entered every day, about 150,000 of them by private automobile. Beginning in February 2003, drivers who entered this area between 7 A.M. and 6:30 P.M. had to pay a fee of £5 (roughly $8) by midnight. The fee steadily increased over the years, and by 2014 it had increased to £11.50 (roughly $18).i Certain types of vehicles, such as ambulances, buses, and taxis, are exempt. Drivers have the option to pay the charge by mail (prepay), text messaging, telephone, or in person at various pay points. Failure to pay the fee results in a fine of £130 (roughly $200).iiSignificantly, this solution makes extensive use of current technologies. From the start, the city installed almost 700 cameras at more than 200 sites in the designated high‐traffic area to photograph the license plates of every vehicle that entered the area. The city transmitted these photos to a data center that translated the photographic images into license plate numbers utilizing automatic number plate recognition technology.To create and implement the congestion charge plan, the government had a number of project risks:Tight schedule: The project needed to be completed under tight deadlines in order to meet multiple statutory requirements and minimize disruptions to commuters.Technology: The cameras had to be strategically placed in order to accurately photograph tens of thousands of license plates every day.Lack of preexisting models: There were no preexisting models in the world to follow.Limited experience and expertise: Livingstone had been recently elected mayor, and the supervising governmental agency—Transport for London—had only recently been created. Thus, neither was experienced in building such a system.Political fallout: The political risk of a system failure to Livingstone was so huge that it would be extremely damaging to his career.Transport for London adopted a series of management strategies to navigate these waters and limit the risks resulting from its limited experience, IT ability, and management time. Perhaps the most significant decision was to outsource the basic management activities to firms that specialized in these areas. For example, PricewaterhouseCoopers first and then Deloitte