Business IT and Logistics
—
Business Project Get research paper samples and course-specific study resources under homework for you course hero writing service – Manage ment (BUSM4611)
Assessment 3: Project appraisal report
Assessment Type: Report, Individual assessment
Word limit: 2300-2500 words
(excluding references, title page, table
of contents)
Due date: Thursday of Week 7 (Thursday at 23:59
AEST/AEDT) Length: No limits
Weighting: 30%
Overview
Each individual student will work on a supplied project and will answer some specific questions, and submit the project
appraisal report. The project appraisal report is an opportunity for post-graduate students to demonstrate what they
have learned during the semester on project management.
Learning Outcomes
– The ability to critically examine project management processes described by the PMBOK and/or
PRINCE2
– The ability to use a range of tools and techniques to develop, monitor and control projects.
Page 2 of 7
Assessment details
Tasks
You are required to work on a supplied project and answer some specific questions, and submit the project appraisal
report. You should discuss each question logically by using multiple references from academic journals and books.
The purpose of project management is to achieve a successful project. Some of the answers are matters of opinion
and you will need to study literature for ways to approach them. To support your answer, you can take help from project
management books, PMBOK, peer reviewed journal articles and authenticated sources.
Report Format
The report needs to consist of the following outlines:
A. Executive summary (brief): Outline clearly the objective of the project, justification to start the Blue Spider
project, findings/lesson learned and recommendations.
B. Introduction (brief): Clearly demonstrate project brief, the purpose of the report, key terms/issues that you are
going to discuss and the report structure.
C. Project Appraisal/Body: You are required to cover the following questions considering the case study:
Case Study: Blue Spider project – relevant file attached (E-reserve)
1. “The truth doesn’t always win proposals”. Was it a write approach? Discuss the ethical issues in different
phases of the project.
2.How did the project team handle risks at different phases of project life cycle? Discuss.
3.Who are the key stakeholders in the project? Briefly discuss the communication management issues with the
major stakeholders.
4.Was the selection of project manager right for the project? Was he qualified to be a project managerrationale
your answer?
5.What happens when a situation of mistrust occurs between the customer and the contractor? Discuss the
issue with respect to the project.
6.Justify the choice of Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract for the project. What other type of contract they could
have chosen, and why?
7.Complete your evaluation of project management for this project, and calculate the average rating using the
following grid and justify your score.
Initiation
stage
Planning
stage
Implementation
stage
Closeout
phase
Average
Scope management
Time management
Resource management
Communication management
Stakeholder management
Risk management
Contract and procurement management
8.Document the lessons learned from this project and provide your recommendations.
D. Others: All topics are required to be clearly explained and easy to follow. The report needs to consist of page
numbers and table of contents. Use the references and citations properly.
Page 3 of 7
Academic integrity and plagiarism
Academic integrity is about honest presentation of your academic work. It means acknowledging the work of others
while developing your own insights, knowledge and ideas.
You should take extreme care that you have:
– Acknowledged words, data, diagrams, models, frameworks and/or ideas of others you have quoted
(i.e. directly copied), summarised, paraphrased, discussed or mentioned in your assessment through
the appropriate referencing methods,
– Provided a reference list of the publication details so your reader can locate the source if necessary.
This includes material taken from Internet sites.
If you do not acknowledge the sources of your material, you may be accused of plagiarism because you have
passed off the work and ideas of another person without appropriate referencing, as if they were your own.
RMIT University treats plagiarism as a very serious offence constituting misconduct.
Plagiarism covers a variety of inappropriate behaviours, including:
– Failure to properly document a source
– Copyright material from the internet or databases
– Collusion between students
For further information on our policies and procedures, please refer to the University website.
Assessment declaration
When you submit work electronically, you agree to the assessment declaration.
Referencing guidelines
You must acknowledge all the courses of information you have used in your
assessments.
Please use RMIT Harvard referencing style for this assignment. Please visit RMIT
library referencing page for more tools such as EndNote, referencing tutorials and
referencing guides for printing.
Submission format
• Step 1- Turnitin submission: Upload the soft copy of your project appraisal
report to Turnitin – assignment-3 Turnitin submission.
• Step 2- Submission for marks/grade: Submit your project appraisal
report through assignment-3 submission folder of Canvas (specific to your
class).
Use
Harvard
referencing style for
this assessment.
Page 4 of 7
Assessment Criteria
Criteria Ratings Pts
Criterion A,
Executive summary
(brief):
Clearly outlines the
objective of the
project, justification
to start the Blue
Spider project,
findings/lesson
learned and
recommendations.
ExcellentOutstanding
application of
effort. Criteria
requirements
fully
achieved.
GoodCompletely
satisfactory.
Has elements
of excellence
but needs to
be consistent
across all
criteria
requirements.
AcceptableHas
potential
to reach the
next level but
still requires
more effort to
fully satisfy
criteria
requirements.
PoorEffort
considered
inferior to the
required
minimum
standard. No or
limited
establishment
of criteria
requirement.
Very
poor/NoneCriteria
not
addressed
or no
submission
received.
2.5 to >2.0
pts
2.0 to >1.5 pts 1.5 to >1.0 pts 1.0 to >0.5 pts 0.5 to 0 pts 2.5
Criterion B,
Introduction (brief):
It clearly
demonstrates project
brief, the purpose of
the report, key
terms/issues you are
going to discuss and
the report structure.
Excellent –
Outstanding
application of
effort. Criteria
requirements
fully
achieved.
GoodCompletely
satisfactory.
Has elements
of excellence
but needs to
be consistent
across all
criteria
requirements.
AcceptableHas
potential
to reach the
next level but
still requires
more effort to
fully satisfy
criteria
requirements.
PoorEffort
considered
inferior to the
required
minimum
standard. No or
limited
establishment
of criteria
requirement.
Very
poor/NoneCriteria
not
addressed
or no
submission
received.
2.5 to >2.0
pts
2.0 to >1.5 pts 1.5 to >1.0 pts 1.0 to >0.5 pts 0.5 to 0 pts 2.5
Criterion C,
Project
Appraisal/Body –
Question 1:
“The truth doesn’t
always win
proposals”. Was it a
write approach?
Discuss the ethical
issues in different
phases of the
project.
Excellent –
Outstanding
application of
effort. Criteria
requirements
fully
achieved.
GoodCompletely
satisfactory.
Has elements
of excellence
but needs to
be consistent
across all
criteria
requirements.
AcceptableHas
potential
to reach the
next level but
still requires
more effort to
fully satisfy
criteria
requirements.
PoorEffort
considered
inferior to the
required
minimum
standard. No or
limited
establishment
of criteria
requirement.
NoneCriteria
not
addressed
or no
submission
received.
2.5 to >2.0
pts
2.0 to >1.5 pts 1.5 to >1.0 pts 1.0 to >0.5 pts 0.5 to 0 pts 2.5
Page 5 of 7
Criterion C,
Project
Appraisal/Body –
Question 2:
How did the project
team handle risks at
different phases of
project life cycle?
Discuss.
Excellent –
Outstanding
application of
effort. Criteria
requirements
fully
achieved.
GoodCompletely
satisfactory.
Has elements
of excellence
but needs to
be consistent
across all
criteria
requirements.
AcceptableHas
potential
to reach the
next level but
still requires
more effort to
fully satisfy
criteria
requirements.
PoorEffort
considered
inferior to the
required
minimum
standard. No or
limited
establishment
of criteria
requirement.
Very poor/
NoneCriteria
not
addressed
or no
submission
received.
2.5 to >2.0
pts
2.0 to >1.5 pts 1.5 to >1.0 pts 1.0 to >0.5 pts 0.5 to 0 pts 2.5
Criterion C,
Project
Appraisal/Body –
Question 3:
Who are the key
stakeholders in the
project? Briefly
discuss the
communication
management issues
with the major
stakeholders.
Excellent –
Outstanding
application of
effort. Criteria
requirements
fully
achieved.
GoodCompletely
satisfactory.
Has elements
of excellence
but needs to
be consistent
across all
criteria
requirements.
AcceptableHas
potential
to reach the
next level but
still requires
more effort to
fully satisfy
criteria
requirements.
PoorEffort
considered
inferior to the
required
minimum
standard. No or
limited
establishment
of criteria
requirement.
Very poor/
NoneCriteria
not
addressed
or no
submission
received.
2.5 to >2.0
pts
2.0 to >1.5 pts 1.5 to >1.0 pts 1.0 to >0.5 pts 0.5 to 0 pts 2.5
Criterion C,
Project
Appraisal/Body –
Question 4:
Was the selection of
project manager right
for the project? Was
he qualified to be a
project managerrationale
your
answer?
Excellent –
Outstanding
application of
effort. Criteria
requirements
fully
achieved.
GoodCompletely
satisfactory.
Has elements
of excellence
but needs to
be consistent
across all
criteria
requirements.
AcceptableHas
potential
to reach the
next level but
still requires
more effort to
fully satisfy
criteria
requirements.
PoorEffort
considered
inferior to the
required
minimum
standard. No or
limited
establishment
of criteria
requirement.
Very
poor/NoneCriteria
not
addressed
or no
submission
received.
2.5 to >2.0
pts
2.0 to >1.5 pts 1.5 to >1.0 pts 1.0 to >0.5 pts 0.5 to 0 pts 2.5
Page 6 of 7
Criterion C,
Project
Appraisal/Body –
Question 5:
What happens when
a situation of mistrust
occurs between the
customer and the
contractor? Discuss
the issue with
respect to the
project.
Excellent –
Outstanding
application of
effort. Criteria
requirements
fully
achieved.
GoodCompletely
satisfactory.
Has elements
of excellence
but needs to
be consistent
across all
criteria
requirements.
AcceptableHas
potential
to reach the
next level but
still requires
more effort to
fully satisfy
criteria
requirements.
PoorEffort
considered
inferior to the
required
minimum
standard. No or
limited
establishment
of criteria
requirement.
Very
poor/NoneCriteria
not
addressed
or no
submission
received.
2.5 to >2.0
pts
2.0 to >1.5 pts 1.5 to >1.0 pts 1.0 to >0.5 pts 0.5 to 0 pts 2.5
Criterion C,
Project
Appraisal/Body –
Question 6:
Justify the choice of
Firm Fixed Price
(FFP) contract for the
project. What other
type of contract they
could have chosen,
and why?
Excellent –
Outstanding
application of
effort. Criteria
requirements
fully
achieved.
GoodCompletely
satisfactory.
Has elements
of excellence
but needs to
be consistent
across all
criteria
requirements.
AcceptableHas
potential
to reach the
next level but
still requires
more effort to
fully satisfy
criteria
requirements.
PoorEffort
considered
inferior to the
required
minimum
standard. No or
limited
establishment
of criteria
requirement.
None or
Very Poor –
Criteria not
addressed
or no
submission
received.
2.5 to >2.0
pts
2.0 to >1.5 pts 1.5 to >1.0 pts 1.0 to >0.5 pts 0.5 to 0 pts 2.5
Criterion C,
Project
Appraisal/Body –
Question 7:
Complete your
evaluation of project
management for this
project, and calculate
the average rating
using the presented
grid and justify your
score.
ExcellentOutstanding
application of
effort. Criteria
requirements
fully
achieved.
GoodCompletely
satisfactory.
Has elements
of excellence
but needs to
be consistent
across all
criteria
requirements.
AcceptableHas
potential
to reach the
next level but
still requires
more effort to
fully satisfy
criteria
requirements.
PoorEffort
considered
inferior to the
required
minimum
standard. No or
limited
establishment
of criteria
requirement.
None or
Very PoorCriteria
not
addressed
or no
submission
received.
2.5 to >2.0
pts
2.0 to >1.5 pts 1.5 to >1.0 pts 1.0 to >0.5 pts 0.5 to 0 pts 2.5
Page 7 of 7
Criterion C,
Project
Appraisal/Body –
Question 8:
Document the
lessons learned from
this project and
provide your
recommendations.
ProfessionalOutstanding
application of
effort. Criteria
requirements
fully
achieved.
GoodCompletely
satisfactory.
Has elements
of excellence
but needs to
be consistent
across all
criteria
requirements.
AcceptableHas
potential
to reach the
next level but
still requires
more effort to
fully satisfy
criteria
requirements.
PoorEffort
considered
inferior to the
required
minimum
standard. No or
limited
establishment
of criteria
requirement.
Very poor/
NoneCriteria
not
addressed
or no
submission
received.
2.5 to >2.0
pts
2.0 to >1.5 pts 1.5 to >1.0 pts 1.0 to >0.5 pts 0.5 to 0 pts 2.5
Criterion D,
Others:
Overall presentation
(all topics are clearly
explained, easy to
follow/clarity of
language, coverage
and completeness,
page numbers, table
of contents), use of
references and
citation, conciseness.
ProfessionalOutstanding
application of
effort. Criteria
requirements
fully
achieved.
GoodCompletely
satisfactory.
Has elements
of excellence
but needs to
be consistent
across all
criteria
requirements.
AcceptableHas
potential
to reach the
next level but
still requires
more effort to
fully satisfy
criteria
requirements.
PoorEffort
considered
inferior to the
required
minimum
standard. No or
limited
establishment
of criteria
requirement.
Very poor/
NoneCriteria
not
addressed
or no
submission
received.
5 to >4 pts 4 to >3 pts 3 to >2 pts 2 to >1 pts 1 to 0 pts 5.0
Total: 30 pts
