Managing projects

 

Important Instruction:
Students are required to submit their assignments through JIRA. Only
assessments submitted through JIRA will be marked. Any other submission
including submission to your study centre in hard copy will be treated as a
non-submission
This is an individual assignment – complete both tasks 1 and 2
Background: The assignment is intended to bring out the benefits and limitations of
different approaches to project planning and control by relating these to the
circumstances in the cases outlined. It is also intended to allow students to
demonstrate their learning and competence in respect of the effective project
management with focus on resources, trade-offs among scope, cost and time, as
well as key elements of the project life cycle.

Task 1 (40 marks) 700 words (+/- 10%) each short answer question requires a
response in a few sentences for the questions awarded up to 4 – 6 marks and a
paragraph for questions awarded up to 8 – 10 marks. Citation(s) is/are essential for
each question to demonstrate students’ ability to fulfill academic writing style in
accordance to Harvard referencing.
1) What are risk responses in project management? Identify and briefly discuss
FOUR (4) types of responses to manage risk.
(8 marks)
2) Sharp View Pte Ltd – a market leader that manufactures high-end optical scope
fitted on hunting rifles for the past 30 years. Recently the top management has
decided to diversify the business by applying its propreitary technology to develop
top-quality binocular. Which project structure would you recommend for this
organisation? Together with a diagram, write short notes to describe the proposed
structure and provide appropriate justifications to support your recommendation.
(6 marks)
3) Project Control Systems are often used to ensure the quality of project outcomes.
Identify and briefly discuss methods (project evaluation, monitoring and control)
you could introduce to ensure a project meets the desired outcome and is
successful.
(6 marks)
4) Identify and briefly discuss the FOUR (4) determinants of project success.
(4 marks)
BFAD5 1814A, BMTD5 1814A, _SIM335 Managing Projects, Individual Assignment Page 3 of 6
5) What is the purpose of establishing project priorities? And what would normally
be considered when setting project priorities.
(6 marks)
6) Your faculty is preparing for the end of course graduation ceremony. Appointed as
the project manager to spearhead the event, you have mapped out the activities
and durations in the table below:
ID Description Preceding Activity Activity
Duration
A Initial Discussion None 3
B Food Planning A 4
C Entertainment Planning A 5
D Drinks Planning A 2
E Committee Approval B, C, D 5
F Student Invitation E 8
G Faculty Invitation E 5
H Furniture Arrangement E 3
I Decorate Hall E 6
J Committee Final Approval F, G, H, I 5
i. What is the purpose of establishing a Project Network Diagram?
ii. Develop an AON project network based on the information provided.
iii. How many days will the project take to complete?
iv. Identify the critical path of this project.
v. Draw the Gantt chart of this project. (10 marks)
The criteria for assessing Task 1 will be:
Referencing: Has/have appropriate citation(s) been included to support relevant
theory presented to answer each question? Has a recognized referencing system
been used for notation? (see relevant section in the Guide to Basic Study Skills)

Task 2: (60 marks)
Case Study: Your organization is planning for a 1-day sports tournament (choose
any indoor or outdoor sports). As the Project Manager appointed by your CEO, you
are in-charge of planning and organizing this event.
As the project is currently at the feasibility stage, you are required to provide a
project plan to organize the event and to prepare a report (2,300 words) for top
management’s approval. From a project management perspective, outline the
key areas required to successfully manage this project – e.g. Project Scope
Statement, Project Priorities, Work Breakdown Structure (with work packages) and
Cost Estimation (with time-phase budget).
The report should demonstrate the skills and competencies required by the Project
Manager, along with relevant project management perspectives.
The criteria for assessing Task 2 will be:
Report presentation (20%) (12 marks)
The extent to which the assignment represents an effective report. This will be
judged on:
Appearance: Is a word count included at the end of the report? Is it within the
specified amount? Is the text double-spaced?
Structure: Does the report follow the conventions of the format? Does it have a clear
introduction explaining the purpose of project? Do the sections of the report develop
ideas in a logical sequence? Are diagrams or other subsidiary information provided
to support relevant sections?
Spelling and grammar: Are all words spelled correctly and is the meaning of
sentences clear?
Referencing: Have appropriate references (minimum of 5) been included in the
report? Has a recognized referencing system been used for notation? (see relevant
section in the Guide to Basic Study Skills)
Use of relevant theory (40%) (24 marks)
Has the right theoretical content been chosen as the basis for answering the
questions? Is there evidence on the use of course notes and books? Is the theory
that is selected significant to the questions?
Analysis (40%) (24 marks)
This measures the extent to which students develop a structured argument for the
points they make, by combining relevant theory with the information provided in the
questions.
Any work submitted is subject to the University’s rules and procedures
governing infringement of assessment regulations.
Assignment presentation and assessment
The answers to both tasks are independent and should be addressed separately.
Task 1 answer to six questions (700 words) – completed as an individual task
Task 2 presented in a report (2,300 words) – completed as an individual task
For your convenience, both Task 1 and Task 2 should be submitted as one
document.
A minimum of 10 references (Task 1 and Task 2 combined) should be included in
the report.
Grading Criteria SIM335 Managing Projects Individual Assignment
First Class (70 – 100%)
A creative and original response to the question. Critically reflecting on
perceived theory and experiences. Wide and appropriate use of sources
(theory and practice) based on reading and experiences. Answer written
fluently, with evidence of a highly developed capacity to structure work
systematically and argue logically.
Upper Second Class (60 – 69%)
Comprehensive knowledge of concepts and theories. Appropriate application
of theory and experience to the question answered. Ability to inter-relate
concepts and ideas. Some originality in approach and awareness of scope and
limitations. Answer systematically structured and coherent.
Lower Second Class (50-59%)
Evidence of knowledge of concepts and theories. Attempts to relate and
balance theory and practice. Main issues addressed appropriately. Mainstream
texts and lecture notes used. Work presented in a structured form but
arguments weak in places.
Third Class (40-49%)
Evidence of uncritical knowledge of main concepts and theories. Limited
attempts to relate theory and practice relaying on personal opinion or
assertions. Limited evidence of reading. Presentation and structure weak in
several places.
Fail (0 – 39%)
Some knowledge of main concepts and theory but major omissions and / or
misunderstandings. Style and structure weak and overly descriptive.
Considerable limitations in the ability to perceive the relationship between
theory and practice. Limited reading.
SIM335: Management of Projects (Academic Year 2018)
Task 2
Criteria 70% + 60-69% 50-59% 40-49% <40%
Use of
relevant
theory
Indicative
weighting =
40% of 60
mark
(24 marks)
The report identifies all the relevant
theories to answer to complete the
task. The theories used are described
in detail. There is clear evidence that
course notes, books and other
sources are used. Theories used are
significant in listing the activities
required to successfully plan and
manage a major project.
The report identifies most of the
relevant theories to answer to
complete the task. On the whole, the
theories used are described in detail.
There is clear evidence that course
notes and books are used. Theories
used are largely significant in listing
the activities required to successfully
plan and manage a major project.
On the whole, the report identifies
the relevant theories required to
answer to complete the task. The
theories used are sometimes described
in detail. Overall, there is clear
evidence that course notes and books
are used. Theories used are significant
in listing the activities required to
successfully plan and manage a major
project.
The report identifies some of the
relevant theories to answer to
complete the task. The theories used
are partly described. There is some
evidence that course notes, and books
are used. Theories used are sometimes
significant in listing the activities
required to successfully plan and
manage a major project.
The report fails to identify the relevant
theories to answer to complete the
task. The theories used are not
described. There is no evidence that
course notes, books or other sources
are used. Theories used are not
significant in listing the activities
required to successfully plan and
manage a major project.
Analysis
Indicative
weighting =
40% of 60
mark
(24 marks)
There is evidence of extensive research
from a variety of sources to provide
better understanding to the
background of the task. A structured
argument is taken for the points made
by combining relevant theories with
information researched or provided in
the task. The conclusions are clear and
link into the requirements of the task.
There is evidence of some extensive
research from a variety of sources to
provide better understanding to the
background of the task. A structured
argument is taken for the points made,
often by combining relevant theories
with information researched or
provided in the task. The conclusions
on the whole are clear and link into the
requirements of the task.
There is evidence of some research to
provide better understanding to the
background of the task but sources
are not extensive. There is some
structured argument taken for the
points made. The relevant theories
are not always combined with
information researched or provided
in the task. The conclusions are not
clear and have only limited linkages
into the requirements of the task.
There is evidence of limited research
being conducted to provide better
understanding to the background of
the task but sources are not extensive.
There is limited structured argument
taken for the points made. There are
only limited combinations of the
relevant theories with information
researched or provided in the task. The
conclusions are descriptive and do not
link into the requirements of the task.
There is no evidence of research from
a variety of sources to provide better
understanding to the background of
the task. There is no structured
argument taken for the points made.
The relevant theories are not
combined with information
researched or provided in the task.
The conclusions are unclear and only
descriptive. Conclusions also do not
link into the requirements of the
task.
Presentation
and
Structure
Indicative
weighting =
20% of 60
mark
(12 marks)
The presentation is clear. There are
no or few spelling or grammatical
errors. The report has been
referenced correctly, using the
Harvard style of referencing. A word
count is provided at the end of the
report and is within the limit of 2000
words. The report is text doublespaced.
The structure of the project is clear,
cohesive and logical. Each section has
been clearly structured using subheadings
(signposts) and these follow
a logical order. Additional diagrams
and other subsidiary information are
shown in the appendices and
properly referenced. Appendices are
relevant and are able to provide a
better understanding to the report.
The presentation is on the whole
clear, there are no or few spelling or
grammatical errors. The project has
been referenced correctly, using the
Harvard style of referencing. A word
count is provided at the end of the
report and is within the limit of 2000
words. The report is text doublespaced.
The structure of the project is on
the whole clear, cohesive and logical.
Each section has been clearly
structured using sub-headings
(signposts) and these on the whole
follow a logical order. Additional
diagrams and other subsidiary
information are shown in the
appendices and properly referenced.
Appendices are mostly relevant and
are able to provide a better
understanding to the report.
The presentation is partially clear.
There are occasional spelling and or
grammatical errors. The project has
not always been referenced correctly,
using the Harvard style of
referencing. A word count is provided
at the end of the report but is not
within the limit of 2000 words. The
report is text double-spaced.
The structure of the project is not
entirely clear, cohesive or logical.
Each section has partially been
clearly structured using some subheadings
(signposts) but it is difficult
to follow. Additional diagrams and
other subsidiary information are
sometimes shown in the appendices
but not always properly referenced.
Appendices are occasionally relevant
and are at times able to provide a
better understanding to the report.
The clarity of the presentation of the
project is limited. There are spelling
and or grammatical errors. The
project has not been referenced
correctly, using the Harvard style of
referencing. The layout is loose and
was difficult to follow.
The structure of the project is not
clear, cohesive or logical. Each section
has been limited structured using some
or no sub-headings (signposts), which
made it very difficult to follow.
Additional diagrams and other
subsidiary information are not shown
in the appendices and not properly
referenced. Appendices are irrelevant
and are not able to provide a better
understanding to the report.
The presentation is unclear. There
numerous spelling or grammatical
errors. The report has not been
referenced correctly, using the
Harvard style of referencing. A word
count is not provided at the end of the
report and is not within the limit of
2000 words. The report is not text
double-spaced.
The structure of the project is unclear,
inconsistent and illogical. Sections are
not clearly structured using subheadings
(signposts) and do not follow
a logical order. Additional diagrams
and other subsidiary information are
not shown in the appendices and not
properly referenced. Appendices are
irrelevant and are not able to provide a
better understanding to the report.
Total: 60 marks

find the cost of your paper