I think the best answer definitely depends on the overall size of the project. In this case, I feel like a liaison assigned to FactoSet could work since the project is not as complex. This is just one person and their sole purpose is to mediate the information between the two companies. There could be a benefit in response time from the liaison since it is just one person and the project tasks are more than likely less complex. If the project were more complex like a medical device development project that involves biologics and electronic components, maybe a formal joint steering committee would be best since there are more people in a steering committee to cover more material and they can communicate information effectively. However, since there are more people in this committee, it may take longer for the committee to make decisions.

For striking the right balance between control and flexibility, I think what must remain unchanged and what can be altered needs to be clear in the project. For example, the dates of tasks on the critical path are not flexible and cannot be altered by the team. This establishes their boundaries very clearly. On the other hand, in order for the team to be flexible I think they should be allowed to make decisions in the project without constant supervision. If they were delayed because of higher management checking their every decision, it would ruin their flexibility as a team. 

Using Adaptive project governance can help with maintaining a balance between control and flexibility. Instead of every step being micromanaged, a leadership team can set the overall goals and milestones for a project, while the teams doing the day-by-day work are allowed to have leeway with adjustment to their methods as needed to deal with unexpected changes. This way the team can quickly make changes without waiting for top-down instructions while still being reminded of the project's scope.

In my opinion both Bone Fix and Facto set should have a formal joint steering committee. This committee can help take major decisions and also monitor the work progress closely. The committee can take decisions on any failures or change of configuration. This will help in broader strategic alignment. Strategic alignment is important in ensuring all aspects of a business are working toward the same goals. It helps to reduce waste, increase efficiencies, and move nimbly in a constantly changing business environment, while bringing its strategic vision to life. The steering committee finalizes project monitoring KPIs (Key performance indicator) to measure successful performance. They periodically review projects, and support in minimizing obstacles that can threaten project outcomes.

To strike a balance between control and flexibility hybrid project management approaches to balance the need for flexibility with the control required to manage projects effectively.

The advantage of hybrid project is,

1) Hybrid project management focuses on outcomes:  In a rapidly-changing business environment, projects often require a high degree of adaptability and flexibility. By embracing change, project managers can ensure that they are able to respond quickly to new challenges and opportunities, and make the necessary adjustments to keep the project on track.

2) Flexibility : Hybrid project management approaches are designed to be flexible, allowing project managers to tailor their approach to the specific needs of the project.

3) Engage stakeholders: By engaging stakeholders, project managers can ensure that all relevant parties are aligned on the goals and objectives of the project, and that everyone is working together to achieve the desired outcomes.

4) Adaptability: By engaging stakeholders, project managers can ensure that all relevant parties are aligned on the goals and objectives of the project, and that everyone is working together to achieve the desired outcomes.

A RACI matrix is a great way to avoid that. When everyone knows who’s responsible for what, it reduces confusion and keeps things moving. Without clear roles, you end up with bottlenecks and delayed decisions—definitely not something you want in a high-stakes project like this.

Communication is another huge piece of the puzzle. Regular check-ins, written updates, and a clear process for escalating issues can help prevent misunderstandings before they turn into bigger problems. A dedicated liaison from BoneFix could help streamline things, but a joint steering committee might provide a more structured way to make sure both companies stay aligned.

The key is finding that sweet spot between control and flexibility—enough structure to keep things on track but not so rigid that it slows down progress.

Effective stakeholder management in projects such as the Injectable bone growth factor syringes between BoneFix and FactoSet hinges on proactive engagement and strategic foresight. One innovative approach that could significantly enhance the alignment and cooperation between all parties involved is the implementation of a dynamic stakeholder engagement platform. This platform would serve as a centralized hub for communication, document sharing, and progress tracking. By integrating real-time updates and feedback mechanisms, this tool would enable continuous dialogue and collaboration, ensuring that all stakeholders remain informed and engaged throughout the project lifecycle.

For instance, in a similar scenario in the pharmaceutical industry, a leading company implemented a digital stakeholder engagement tool during the rollout of a new drug. This platform allowed for seamless updates and feedback loops between the R&D teams, regulatory bodies, and manufacturing units, significantly reducing delays and misunderstandings. The tool was particularly effective in managing complex regulatory requirements and production challenges, ensuring that all milestones were met without compromising the integrity of the project.

In terms of balancing control and flexibility, adopting an agile project management approach could be key. Agile methodologies, characterized by iterative processes and flexible responses to change, can be tailored to fit the regulatory and developmental needs of medical device projects. By organizing the project into phases that allow for iterative reviews and adaptations, the project team can maintain stringent control over critical aspects while also accommodating necessary adjustments as the project evolves. This approach not only ensures that the project adheres to all regulatory and partnership agreements but also allows for adaptability in response to unforeseen challenges or opportunities.

As mentioned before, a RACI can certainly help decrease the ambiguity associated with the development of a syringe that does not leak and clump. However, a RACI does not directly address the risks that can occur, especially when engaging in a "partnership" between two companies. To solve this, a risk register can be established to identify potential issues before they happen. This in addition to regular meetings between dedicated liaisons or an official committee can ensure the long-term success of the project. The benefit of a risk register could be that one bottleneck that exists within BoneFix will reduce its impact on FactoSet. The risk register can also allow the companies to align their manufacturing and validation schedules to ensure the proper materials can be produced and delivered when it is not an issue for both companies. Identifying risks and communicating them between the two parties involved can indeed provide flexibility, while maintaining control over the development of the project. It also allows for an agile response to risks as both teams from each company can respond to problems in a timely manner before they become a more significant issue, which maintains the shared objectives.