RATIONALE
This module equips participants with the analytical, practical, technical, and software skills necessary to manage business projects successfully. To this end, the module explores each stage of the project lifecycle model (initiation, planning, execution and closure) and examines the different skills required of the project manager at each stage.
As befits the requirements of a higher degree such as the MBA, the content of this module explores and critiques the full range of theoretical perspectives and outlines the expertise required for delivering more advanced projects including large scale, long-term, and transnational undertakings.
Students will also examine both ethical considerations and the human resourcing challenges inherent to the project environment.
The module, through module aims and learning outcomes, will also provide students with opportunities to develop relevant project management skills that are
transferable between methodologies, namely: advocacy; plurality; accountability;
empowerment and application.
AIMS
1. To understand and critically evaluate project management frameworks and methodologies.
2. To understand and critically evaluate the project lifecycle model, and the different skills required of the project manager in each of the four
lifecycle stages.
3. To become proficient in the use of Microsoft Project software, but also to recognize and understand the limitations of all project management software.
4. To understand that risk/uncertainty is inherent to project management, and to develop the skills necessary both to minimize risk but also to re- conceptualize unanticipated events as opportunities rather than setbacks.
5. To recognize, understand and critically evaluate the various measures of success in the field of projects and project management as well as developing the skills necessary to deliver successful projects.
6. To explore advanced aspects of project management, including large scale, long-term and transnational undertakings.
7. To recognize and understand that the discipline of project management continues to evolve and future challenges will more than likely include addressing human resource problems inherent to project- based
organization as well as specific ethical concerns.
LEARNING OUTCOMES
On successful completion of this module, students will be able to:
1. Analyse complex projects to design and allocate defined tasks to a project team;
2. Manage the key project variables of time, cost and quality;
3. Use project management software to develop, implement and monitor projects;
4. Evaluate the various risks inherent to the project environment and mitigate accordingly.
INDICATIVE CONTENT Project Management
• Defining a project
• The project executive and manager
• Project teams
• The Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)
• The Gantt chart
• The critical path method
• Commercial project management methodologies
Project Lifecycle, Risk and Success
• Initiation, Planning, Execution and Closure
• Risk categories and management
• Opportunities management
• Project success criteria
• Project management: Mega; Multi; and Transnational
• Ethics
• HR Aspects of project-based management
• The future of project management
Using Microsoft Project Software (IT-lab work)
• Scheduling
• Resourcing
• Advanced features
LEARNING AND TEACHING STRATEGIES
• Student role: students will be expected to undertake significant reading, research and familiarisation of relevant project management software
• Tutor role: tutors will provide direction, including lecture, case study input and website-based briefings; tutors will facilitate online seminars and provide online critical support and feedback.
ASSESSMENT
Formative assessment
Students will be required to produce a basic work breakdown structure and Gantt chart for a proposed project of their choice. Tutors will provide feedback on this work.
20
Summative assessment
Planning a project
a) Propose and outline a project. Clearly outline the project’s rationale
and objective(s). [10%]
b) Using Microsoft Project software, break your project down into at least thirty tasks, stipulate the anticipated duration of each, and define relevant relationships between the tasks. You may also wish to group the tasks to reflect the distinct phases of the selected project’s life cycle from initiation through to completion. Please also list and allocate all envisaged resources relevant to the project. Notably, you are expected to describe in detail how you have used the software, and to assist you in this, you should include up to ten screenshots of your project (as it appears in the MS Project software) in this section of your assignment. [45%]
c) “In the entire history of projects from the beginning of time until the day after tomorrow, no project has ever been completed precisely as it was planned. Uncertainty is a way of life for project managers and their projects.” (Meredith and Mantel 2010: 205). Critically evaluate your project in terms of risk management, proposing feasible solutions to the risks/uncertainty that may arise in your project. Ensure all references conform to the Harvard convention. [45%]
Reference: Meredith J and Mantel S (2010) Project Management: A Managerial Approach, New York: John Wiley & Sons
PLEASE NOTE:
THIS IS A WRITTEN ASSIGNMENT AND MUST BE SUBMITTED IN MS WORD. DO NOT SUPPLY YOUR MS PROJECT DOCUMENT, BUT INSTEAD ILLUSTRATE YOUR WRITTEN DOCUMENT WHERE APPROPRIATE WITH SCREENSHOTS TAKEN FROM MS PROJECT.
Learning outcomes assessed: all learning outcomes assessed against the grading nature of the assignment set. Support and guidance will be provided for the assignment.
Component number
Form of assessment
Assessment size
Weighting
(%) Learning
outcomes assessed Core or
non- core
1 Individual
Project
Plan/report
4000
100%
1-5
Core
INDICATIVE READING
Textbook
Meredith J, Mantel S, and Shafer, S (2015) Project Management: A Managerial
Approach, 9th Edition (International Student Version); NJ: Wiley
Additional reading
Charvat J (2003) Project Management Methodologies, New Jersey: Wiley
Arvidsson N (2009) ‘Exploring tensions in projectified matrix organizations’,
Scandinavian Journal of Management, 25: 97-107
Baccarini D (1999) ‘The Logical Framework Method for Defining Project Success’,
Project Management Journal, 30(4): 25-32
Cicmil et al. (2009) ‘Project management behind the façade’, Ephemera: Theory
& Politics in Organization, 9(2): 78-92
Cicmil S & Hodgson D (2006) ‘New possibilities for project management theory’, Project Management Journal, 37(3): 111-122
Cicmil S et al. (2006) ‘Rethinking project management: Researching the actuality of projects’, International Journal of Project Management, 24: 675-686
Edward Elgar Publishing; Zhai L, Xin Y, and Cheng C (2009) ‘Understanding the value of project management from a stakeholder’s perspective: case study of mega- project management’, Project Management Journal, 40(1): 99-109
Engwall M & Jerbrant A (2003) ‘The resource allocation syndrome: the prime challenge of multi-project management’, International Journal of Project Management, 21(6): 403-409
Flyvbjerg B (2003) Megaprojects and risk: an anatomy of ambition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press;
Kendra K & Taplin L (2004) ‘Project success: A cultural framework’,
Project Management Journal, 35(1): 30-45
Lim C & Mohamed M (1999) ‘Criteria of project sucess An exploratory
re- examination’, International Journal of Project Management, 17(4) :
243-248
Makilouko M (2004) ‘Coping with multicultural projects: The leadership styles of
Finnish project managers’, International Journal of Project Management, 22: 387-396
Maylor H (2010) [See sections D1, D2, D3 & D4], Project Management, FT: Prentice Hall
Maylor H (2010) ‘Risk & opportunities management’, in Project Management,
FT: Prentice Hall
Microsoft Project Software; MS Project online help; Chatfield C & Johnson T (2010)
Microsoft Project 2010 Step by Step, Washington: Microsoft Press
Munns A & Bjeirmi B (1996) ‘The role of project management in achieving project sucess’, International Journal of Project Management, 14(2): 81-87
Priemus H & Flyvbjerg B (eds) (2008) Decision-making on mega-projects:
cost- benefit analysis, planning and innovation, Cheltenham:
Shenhar et al. (2001) ‘Project success: A multidimensional strategic concept’,
Long Range Planning, 34: 699-725
Ward S & Chapman C (2003) ‘Transforming project risk management into project uncertainty management’, International Journal of Project Management,
21: 97-105
Assessment Criteria
Distinction (70% – 100%) Merit (60%-69%) Pass (50% – 59%) Refer (<50%) Coherent and detailed knowledge and understanding of the subject area, at least some of which is informed by the latest research and/or advanced scholarship within the discipline Excellent systematic, theoretical and conceptual understanding of knowledge at or informed by the forefront of the field of study and showing sophisticated depth, breadth, detail and clarity An effective, systematic, theoretical and conceptual understanding of knowledge mostly at or informed by the forefront of the field of study and showing good depth, breadth, detail and clarity A sufficient but limited level of systematic, theoretical and conceptual understanding of knowledge at times at or informed by the forefront of the field of study but showing adequate depth, breadth, detail and clarity Limited knowledge and understanding of the subject matter shown. Work is not sufficiently informed by scholarship within the field of study and is insufficient in depth, breadth, detail or clarity Cognitive and intellectual skills Sophisticated critical evaluation and awareness of current problems, and contemporary issues and debates that draws on new insights or perspectives within the field. Work demonstrates a very high level of originality and creativity in the student’s approaches to synthesising current research and advanced scholarship within the subject area An effective level of critical evaluation and awareness of current problems and contemporary issues and debates that draws on new insights or perspectives within the field. Work demonstrates some effective originality and creativity in synthesising current research and scholarship within the subject area. A sufficient but limited level of critical evaluation and awareness of current problems and contemporary issues and debates, with some reference to new insights or perspectives within the field. Limited evidence of originality and creativity in synthesising current research and scholarship within the subject area Insufficient evidence of critical evaluation and awareness of current problems and contemporary issues and debates. Insufficient reference to new insights or perspectives within the field and lacking in originality and creativity in synthesising current research and scholarship within the subject area Application of theory to practice An excellent level of originality and innovation in the application of knowledge and theory to professional practice within the discipline. Demonstration of excellent critical awareness and evaluation and the ability to effectively critique and employ current academic literature in making reasoned judgements and decisions in relation to complex issues and problems at a professional level A good level of originality and innovation in the application of knowledge and theory to professional practice. Demonstration of consistently good critical awareness and evaluation and reasonable ability to use the academic literature in making reasoned judgements and decisions in relation to complex issues and problems at a professional level A reasonable but limited level of originality and innovation in the application of knowledge and theory to professional practice within the discipline. Demonstration of some good critical awareness and evaluation and some ability to use the academic literature in developing judgements and decisions in relation to complex issues and problems at a professional level Little evidence of originality and innovation and a significant lack of application of knowledge and theory to professional practice demonstrating little critical awareness and evaluation and a lack of ability to use the academic literature to make judgements and decisions in relation to complex issues and problems at a professional level Reading and referencing A very high level of critical engagement across an extensive range of relevant and current academic, research, policy- and practice-related literature demonstrating deep and appropriate reading and initiative along with highly consistent accurate referencing A good level of critical engagement across a good range of relevant and current academic, research, policy- and practice-related literature demonstrating appropriate reading and some initiative along with consistent accurate referencing. Sufficient critical engagement with a reasonable range of relevant and current academic, research, policy- and practice-related literature demonstrating mainly appropriate reading but limited initiative and/or some minor inconsistencies and inaccuracies in referencing. Little evidence of critical engagement with relevant and current literature. Poor use of appropriate sources and/or inconsistent and inaccurate referencing Presentation, style and structure Outstanding presentation of work that is logically and coherently structured with a strong or original central argument(s), conveyed with a high level of fluency and eloquently communicates compelling, coherent conclusions to specialist and non-specialist audiences High quality presentation of work that is largely logically and coherently structured with a generally strong central argument conveyed with a clarity of expression and which communicates clear conclusions to specialist and non-specialist audiences Generally good presentation of work that is sufficiently logical and coherent in structure with a discernible central argument. May present limited originality and lack some clarity of expression, but an identifiable conclusion reasonably communicated to specialist and non-specialist audiences Often poorly presented work that is disorganised, has an ill-formed central argument, and lacks a logical and coherent structure. A lack of clarity of expression or fails to communicate effective conclusions to specialist or non-specialist audiences