COURSEWORK QUESTION PAPER: 1st sit Autumn 2023 Semester-long

Module Code:	BA5057NI
Module Title:	Effective Project Management
Module Leader:	Asira Khanal (Islington College)

Coursework Type:	Individual Portfolio of project documents based on a case study. (2500 words)
Coursework Weight:	This coursework accounts for 100% of your total module grades.
Submission Date:	TBA
When Coursework is given out:	TBA
Submission Instructions:	Submit the following at the MST platform on a single PDF format. The following naming convention should be followed while submitting ● 1 x Final Submission PDF ● File name example: 12312324 Darshan Gyawali
Warning:	London Metropolitan University and Islington College take Plagiarism seriously. Offenders will be dealt with sternly.

© London Metropolitan University

Section A: Learning outcomes of the assessments 

The assignment addresses the following learning outcome/s of the module: 

● LO 1. assess common types of projects and determine a suitable project approach and organisation based on either Agile or Linear methods 

● LO 2. plan a project and manage the execution of the plan 

● LO 3. assess and manage project risks 

Section B: Introduction 

Students will complete a set of tasks that require them to create key project documents e.g. 

● Project Brief 

● Work Breakdown Structure 

● MS Project Plan 

The summative assessment will be case-based and require the students to assess a project scenario and produce a portfolio of project documents based on their chosen project approach. This assessment encourages students to develop and practice the following skills: 

● Business research, logical reasoning, critical thinking, writing, problem-solving, and decision making 

Section C: Assessment Strategy 

This assessment enables you to understand the role of the project manager, the nature of projects and how to manage them successfully, focusing on the linear project in which the project output is clearly defined at the commencement of the project. Such projects are typical in the construction industry but can be found widely in business organisations. You will also look at the way Agile projects change the approach to project delivery to deal with uncertainty in the product to be delivered and to accept changes in requirements or circumstances. 

You are required to demonstrate an understanding of the following learning by completion of this summative assessment. 

● assess projects to determine the approach most likely to succeed ● contribute to the design and development of effective project organisations that provide governance, assurance, support and direction to the project team ● plan and manage simple projects using both linear and agile methods ● prepare key project documents 

Page 2 of 14

There are two parts to this assessment. Following is a summary of different activities you need to complete for the final submission. 

Part	Tasks
Part I Case-Based – Project Management (80%)	Task 01: Project Justification and Management Method (700 words)
	Task 02: Project planning and Project documents – (1500 words)
Part II Project Management (20%)	Task 03: Critical Path Analysis – 300 words

Part 1: Case-Based – Project Management 

There are two tasks you have to complete for this part. 

● Task 01: Project justification (700 words) 

● Task 02: Project planning and Project documents (1500 words) 

You are required to read the project background carefully to perform Task 01 and Task 02 

Phyllis Henry, vice president of new product development, sat at her desk trying to make sense of the latest new project proposals she had just received from her staff. Nova Western, Inc., a large developer of business software and application programs, had been experiencing a downturn in operating revenues over the past three quarters. The senior management team was feeling pressure from the board of directors to take steps to correct this downward drift in revenues and profitability. The consensus opinion was that Nova Western needed some new product ideas, and fast. 

The report Phyllis was reading contained the results of a project screening conducted by two independent groups within the new product development department. After several weeks of analysis, it appeared that two top contenders had emerged as the optimal new project opportunities. One project, code-named Janus, was championed by the head of software development. This was an AI enabled Hospital Management system. The other project idea, Gemini, had the support of the business applications organisation and was AI enabled Customer Relationship Management System. 

Janus held the vision of revolutionising healthcare management through an AI-enabled Hospital Management system. Spearheaded by the esteemed head of the 

Page 3 of 14

software development division, Janus promised to streamline patient care, optimise resource allocation, and enhance overall operational efficiency in medical institutions. 

On the other hand, Gemini, the brainchild of the business applications organisation, offered an AI-enabled Customer Relationship Management System. Backed by robust support, Gemini aimed to redefine customer interactions, tailor experiences, and empower businesses to forge stronger, more meaningful relationships with their clientele. 

As Phyllis revisited her initial directive to her team, a challenging task loomed ahead: selecting the project that Nova Western should rally behind. The evaluation process was no simple endeavour, considering the constraints imposed by budget limitations. 

The reality was stark – only one project could secure the necessary funding for its realisation. Phyllis’s original charge to her staff was to prepare an evaluation of both projects to decide which one Nova Western should support. 

The first evaluation team used a scoring model, based on the key strategic categories at Nova Western, to evaluate the two projects. The categories they employed were: (1) strategic fit, (2) probability of technical success, (3) financial risk, (4) potential profit, and (5) strategic leverage (ability of the project to employ and enhance company resources and technical capabili- ties). Using these categories, the team evaluated the two projects as shown here. Scores were based on: 1 = low, 2 = medium, and 3 = high. 

Project Janus 

Project Janus
S.N.	Category	Importance Score Weighted Score
1	Strategic Fit	3 2
2	Probability of Technical Success	2 2
3	Financial Risk	2 1
4	Potential Profit	3 3

5 Strategic Leverage 1 1 

Project Gemini 

Page 4 of 14

Project Gemini
S.N.	Category	Importance Score Weighted Score
1	Strategic Fit	3 3
2	Probability of Technical Success	2 2
3	Financial Risk	2 2
4	Potential Profit	3 3
5	Strategic Leverage	1 2

The second team of evaluators presented a payback period and NPV analysis of the two projects to Phyllis. In that analysis, the evaluators assumed a required rate of return of 15% and an anticipated inflation rate of 3% over the life of the project. The findings of this team were as follows: 

Project Janus 

Initial investment = Rs. 250,000 

Life of the project = 5 years 

Anticipated stream of future cash flows: 

Year 1 = Rs. 50,000 

Year 2 = Rs. 100,000 

Year 3 = Rs. 100,000 

Year 4 = Rs. 200,000 

Year 5 = Rs. 75,000 

Project Gemini 

Initial investment = Rs. 400,000 

Life of the project = 3 years 

Anticipated stream of future cash flows: 

Year 1 = Rs. 75,000 

Year 2 = Rs. 250,000 

Year 3 = Rs. 300,000 

Task Briefs: 

Page 5 of 14

The assessment is been divided into two parts: 

● Task 001: Project justification & structure (700 words) 

● Task 002: Project Planning of documents (1500 words) 

Note: Your assignment should be presented as a separate report for each task, using the given structure: 

Task details 

Task 01: Project Justification and Management Method (700 words) Questions 

1. Phyllis has called you into her office to help her select one out of two projects using the simplified weighted score model, payback period and NPV. Are there any contradictions in the outcomes of each method? What are the strengths and weaknesses of each screening method? Justify your final selection. 

2. Suggest project management method for the project selected and justify your answer and support with literature. 

Task 02: Project planning and Project documents (1500 words) 

The company wants to get more details about the project before making the decision and has asked you again to provide full documentation of the project planning before making the final selection. 

You will work on one of the projects (this may be different from than one that you have selected in Task 01) and develop a written report covering the following things: 

● Project brief & scope statement of the selected project supported by relevant references. 

● assumptions, 

● objectives, 

● deliverables, 

● milestones, 

● technical requirements, 

● acceptance criteria, and 

● constraints 

● Project work breakdown structure (WBS) 

● You need to develop 3 levels of WBS (Project, Deliverables, 

Sub-deliverables and Tasks) 

Page 6 of 14

● Project Gantt Chart and Network Diagram for the selected project using MS Project supported by relevant references. 

● Your Gantt chart should include a minimum of 10 activities and 3 deliverables, duration, predecessors, start and finish date, task name, resources and outline number. 

● Deliverables: e.g., market survey, design product components, initial production & test and validation 

● Stakeholder assessment plan for the selected project supported by relevant references. 

● You need to identify a minimum of 5 stakeholders. 

● You need to produce and analyze the stakeholder management plan. ● For analysis of stakeholders, it is expected to apply tools like the power–interest matrix 

● Based on the analysis, a stakeholder management plan has to be developed 

● Risk management plan for the selected project supported by relevant literature. 

You need to use a suitable template (form and chart) that describes the risks clearly, shows the likelihood, impact, owner and approach (accept, transfer, mitigate etc.) and identifies a minimum of 5 key risks for the selected project. 

● Project Success Factors and Balanced Scorecard 

You are required to evaluate a minimum of five success factors for the selected project supported by relevant literature. Also develop a Balanced Scorecard Template to monitor the performance of the project. 

● Conclusion 

Part II Project Management 

Task 03: Critical Path Analysis – 300 words 

Innovate Fiber manufactures storage units for commercial use. The president of Innovate Fiber is contemplating producing units for home use. The activities necessary to build an experimental model and related data are given in the following table: 

Activi ty

Best- Most Optimistic (days)

Likely – Most Worst – likely (days) Most

Normal Cost ($)

Immediate Predecess ors

Page 7 of 14

		Pessimistic (days)
A	12	15 25	1,000	–
B	4	6 11	2,000	A
C	12	12 30	300	–
D	8	15 20	1,300	B,C
E	7	12 15	850	A
F	9	9 42	4,000	E
G	13	17 19	1,500	D, E
H	5	10 15	3,000	F
I	11	13 20	2,000	G
J	2	3 6	1,300	G,H
K	8	12 22	1,200	J,I

Required: 

a. Construct a network diagram by going through the forward and backward passes. You are required to show hand-written work. Submit the hard paper to your module lecturer and also include the picture of this work in your pdf submission. (10 marks) 

b. What is the duration of the project and its normal cost? (2 marks) 

c. Write down all paths through the project by discerning between the critical and non-critical paths. 

(2 marks) 

d. Interpret the result of the critical path analysis in terms of the project planning (6 marks) 

Section D: Assessment submission 

The student must work individually to develop the answers to the given assignment. There is no tolerance for COLLUSION. 

The student should submit one final file in a pdf format to MySecondTeacher on the given deadline. The word limit of the final report is a 2,500-word limit excluding tables, appendices and bibliography. Submissions of excessive length, or which attempt to subvert length criteria with the misuse of appendices, will be penalized. 

Students must submit a screenshot of completed work using MS-Project as well. Such supporting details should be annexed to the main report. 

Page 8 of 14

Standard University regulations regarding plagiarism will apply and be rigorously enforced. THIS INCLUDES THE USE OF PUBLISHED SECONDARY RESEARCH (E.G. MINTEL, ETC.) WITHOUT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND/OR INTERPRETATION. The course tutor will also apply penalties to submissions which in his/her sole opinion show evidence of collusion. 

Section F: Recommended Table of contents 

● Cover page 

● Table of content 

● List of Figures and Table 

● Task 01: Project justification and Structure 

● Task 02: Project planning and Project documents 

● Task 03: Critical Path Analysis 

● References list 

● Appendix 

Section E: Marking Criteria: How you will be evaluated? 

Tasks	Criteria
Task 01: Project justification and Structure (700 words)	Introduction and understanding of the task Accuracy of calculation Justification of the selected project (proposal) Justification of the project management method Use appropriate project management theories, models and literature. Structure and Document Formatting Citation and referencing
Task 02: Project planning and Project documents – (1500 words)	Introduction and understanding of the task Development of Project Brief Development of Project Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) Development of Gantt Chart and Network Diagram Development of Stakeholder assessment plan Development of Risk management plan Critical Success Factors and Balanced Scorecard Conclusion Use appropriate project management theories, models and literature. Structure and Proper Document formatting Citation and referencing
Task 03: Critical Path Analysis – 300 words	Accuracy of Network Diagram Accuracy of Calculation Use appropriate project management theories, models and literature. Proper document formatting and presentation

Page 9 of 14

Citation and referencing

Note: 

● You are required to research and apply project management theories and literature to complete the report. You will need to employ a minimum of 10 separate sources, including a minimum of 3 scientific journal articles across the tasks of your report to support the application of project management tools and techniques. 

● You need to prepare your Gantt chart, WBS (three levels) and network diagram by using MS Project. You may take a screenshot of all your MS Project outputs and paste it into your report. Please be informed that all tables and figures should have a caption. 

Section G: Recommended Reading for references 

Core Texts 

● Kloppenborg, T. J. and Anantatmula, V. S. (2019) Contemporary Project Management. 4th Revised edition. Cengage Learning India. 

● Bennett, N. and Axelos (2017). Managing successful projects with PRINCE2. 6th ed. Norwich: stationery Office 

● Larson, E. W., Gray, C. F., & Gray, C. F. (2017). Project management: the managerial process 7th ed. McGraw Hill Education. 

Journals 

● International Journal of Construction Project Management 

● International Journal of Information Systems and Project Management ● International Journal of Project Management 

● PM Network 

● PM World Journal 

On-Line Sources: 

● www.agilebusiness.org 

● www.apm.org.uk 

● www.axelos.com 

● www.pmi.org 

● www.pmtoday.co.uk 

● www.projectmanagement.com 

● www.thepmchannelnews.com 

Page 10 of 14

Section H: Assessment Grade Description 

GSBL UNDERGRADUATE GENERAL GRADE DESCRIPTORS 

	Level 3 or 4	Level 5 Level 6
General	Acquisition of broad knowledge Evaluate information Use the information to plan, develop and problem solve	Generate ideas through Critically review, consolidate analysing concepts and extend a body of Demonstrate command of knowledge using specialised skills specialised skills Formulate responses to Critically evaluate concepts well-defined and abstract and evidence from a range Analyse and evaluate of sources information Transfer and apply skills and exercise significant judgement in a range of situations
70-100 (A)	Very good Demonstration of a very good comprehension of the task with evidence of analysis, synthesis, evaluation and critical appraisal Use of a wide variety of appropriate sources Transformation of knowledge Independent thinking and development of ideas Ability to communicate very clearly and effectively Very good evidence of preparation Very good organisation, structure and presentation of work – minimal errors Good references, and appropriate sources	Excellent Excellent – Outstanding (for Advanced scholarship use at the far end the of Goes beyond the material range) provided Outstanding understanding, Excellent link to research exploration and insight Excellent analysis, Strong evidence of synthesis, evaluation and originality and development critical appraisal of own ideas Excellent evidence of Develop a highly complex preparation argument Comprehensive and critical Outstanding ability to understanding of the topic communicate topics clearly Excellent ability to and concisely communicate clearly and Advanced organisation, effectively structure and presentation Excellent organisation, of work structure and presentation Good references, and of work appropriate sources (quality Good references, and and quantity). No errors in appropriate sources reference list or citations. (quality and quantity). No References well utilised and errors in the reference list critiquedor citations.

Page 11 of 14

	(quality and quantity). No errors in reference list or citations.
60-69 (B) 50-59 ©	Very good Demonstration of a very good comprehension of the task with evidence of analysis, synthesis, evaluation Use of a wide variety of appropriate sources Transformation of knowledge Independent thinking and development of ideas Ability to communication clearly and effectively Very good evidence of preparation Very good organisation, structure and presentation of work – minimal errors Good references, and appropriate sources (quality and quantity). Minimal or no errors in reference list or citations. Adequate – Satisfactory Some analysis but limited Some insight and exploration of ideas Sound conclusions No significant inaccuracies or omissions Some analysis, evaluation or synthesis of information Lacking clarity at times Some evidence of preparation Referencing is sound. Mostly appropriate sources. Numerous errors or inconsistencies	Very good Very Good Demonstration of a very Advanced scholarship good comprehension of the Goes beyond the material task with evidence of provided analysis, synthesis, Very good link to research evaluation Very good analysis, Use of a wide variety of synthesis, evaluation and appropriate sources critical appraisal Transformation of Very good evidence of knowledge preparation Independent thinking and Comprehensive and critical development of ideas understanding of the topic Ability to communication Very good ability to clearly and effectively communicate clearly and Very good evidence of effectively preparation Very good organisation, Very good organisation, structure and presentation structure and presentation of work of work – minimal errors Good references, and Good references, and appropriate sources (quality appropriate sources and quantity). No errors in (quality and quantity). the in reference list or Minimal or no errors in citations. reference list or citations. Adequate – Satisfactory Adequate- Satisfactory Some evidence of thinking Evidence of thinking independently to develop independently to develop own ideas own ideas Evaluation of relevant Evaluation of relevant theories or literature theories or literature Reasonable ability to Ability to communicate communicate clearly and clearly and effectively effectively Report information in a Report information in a structured way structured way Use of an appropriate Use of an appropriate format format Reasonably Accurate, quite Quite comprehensive comprehensive knowledge knowledge Satisfactory evidence of Satisfactory evidence of preparation preparation Coherent and well Satisfactory referencing, presented – minor errors and appropriate sources. Satisfactory referencing, Numerous but minor errors and appropriate sources. in references Minor errors in references
40-49 (D)	All learning outcomes met Competent (practical) May be incomplete in knowledge (some errors or omissions) Insufficient analysis, evaluation or synthesis	All learning outcomes All learning outcomes met met Competent (practical) Competent (practical) May be incomplete in It May be incomplete in knowledge (some errors or knowledge (some errors or omissions) omissions) Weak or no analysis, Weak or no analysis, evaluation or synthesisevaluation or synthesis

Page 12 of 14

	Limited application of theories/knowledge Awareness of appropriate principles/theories/techniqu es Irrelevance to the task at times Disorganised work with a weak standard of presentation Numerous aberrations from the requirements of the task Referencing is attempted although may be inconsistent, many errors, weak sources	Some application of Some application of theories/knowledge theories/knowledge Awareness of appropriate An awareness of principles/theories/techniqu appropriate es principles/theories/techniqu Irrelevance to the task at es times Irrelevance to the task at Disorganised work with times weak standard of Disorganised work with presentation weak standard of Aberrations from the presentation requirements of the task Aberrations from the Referencing is attempted requirements of the task although may be Referencing is attempted inconsistent, many errors, although may be weak sources inconsistent, many errors, weak sources
Condone d Pass 30-39 (R2/F1)	Learning outcomes not met Little relevant knowledge Lacking structure Numerous errors in structure and form Limited understanding of concepts/theories No appropriate analysis, evaluation or synthesis Significant inaccuracies/omissions Not competent Little or no attempt to use references and if so very weak with errors	Learning outcomes not met Learning outcomes not met Little relevant knowledge Little relevant knowledge Lacking structure Lacking structure Numerous errors in Numerous errors in structure and form structure and form Limited understanding of Limited understanding of concepts/theories concepts/theories No appropriate analysis, No appropriate analysis, evaluation or synthesis evaluation or synthesis Significant Significant inaccuracies/omissions inaccuracies/omissions Not competent Not competent Little or no attempt to use Little or no attempt to use references and if so very references and if so very weak with errors weak with errors
Under 30 (R2/F2)	Little engagement with the task No basic understanding of the subject matter Poor communication (written or verbal) Lacking or no structure Significant errors in structure and form Many significant inaccuracies/omissions – very little correct Little or no attempt to use references and if so, very weak with many significant errors	Little engagement with the Little engagement with the task task No basic understanding of No basic understanding of the subject matter the subject matter Poor communication Poor communication (written or verbal) (written or verbal) Lacking or no structure Lacking or no structure Significant errors in Significant errors in structure and form structure and form Many significant Many significant inaccuracies/omissions – inaccuracies/omissions – very little correct very little correct Little or no attempt to use Little or no attempt to use references and if so, very references and if so, very weak with many significant weak with many significant errors errors
(0%)	No submission Nothing of relevance in the work submitted	No submission No submission Nothing of relevance in the Nothing of relevance in the work submitted work submitted

End of the Document 

Page 13 of 14

Page 14 of 14