Hello, dear friend, you can consult us at any time if you have any questions, add WeChat: daixieit

BUSINESS SCHOOL

Discipline of Business Information Systems

INFS6071 Project Management in Business Semester 2 2023

Individual assignment 1

Part 1 (24%) and Part 2 (6%)

Due date: 11:59 pm 6 October 2023

General instructions

There are two parts to the assignment. To undertake the assignment, students should follow the instructions below:

•    The maximum length of the assignment is 2000 words comprising 1600 words for Part 1 and 400 words for Part 2. You can exceed the word count by 10% for each part.

The  length of document does  not  include  cover  page,  list of references and table of contents.

•     For     further     information,     please     refer     to     the     business     school      policies: http://sydney.edu.au/business/currentstudents/policy .

Final report submission: The report should be submitted via Canvas by due date. Please include course name, title of the report and student ID on the front page (cover page) of the submission.  The link for the submission can be found on Canvas in the Assessment section.   You  should  name  the  submission file  as follows: SID.pdf, e.g.  123456.pdf. Please note that you SHOULD NOT provide name (first name or family name) in the assignment document.

•     Please submit the assignment as a pdf file.

•     Use Arial font, size 11 points.

•     Use 1.5 spacing.

•     Use A4 paper and portrait orientation.

•     Proof-read and sense-check your report before submitting it.

•     Use the Business School Referencing Guide (APA 6th  or 7th  edition is fine).

•     Please see marking guidelines on pages 4-6 of this document.

IMPORTANT: You can submit the assignment only once! Please make sure that the file that you submit is the final version.

Part 1 (24 marks)

Requirements

Download and read the case study (pdf file) found at the following link:

https://audit.wa.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Report-25_WA%E2%80%99s-Transition-to- the-NDIS.pdf

Then analyse the findings on the “WA’s transition to the NDIS” project from the perspective of the formal project management methodology, PMBOK6 (i.e. PMBOK 6th edition).

Based on your analysis, respond to the following questions:

1.   Where and how there is evidence of such a methodology being applied and its contribution. Please provide your answer in the form of a table outlining the relevant PMBOK knowledge areas, evidence of application, and contribution. (6 marks)

2.   Where  and  how  such  a  methodology  might  have  helped  avoid  or  mitigate  identified problems.  Please  provide  your  answer  in  the  form  of  a  table  outlining  the  relevant knowledge areas and PMBOK processes that could have been applied. Give concrete examples of what kind of tools and techniques could have been applied. (10 marks)

3.    If there were problems that appear to be outside the scope of PMBOK, discuss these problems. Conduct your own academic research and research about the project to provide ideas on how these problems could have been mitigated. (8 marks)

General requirements:

•      Clear, well-structured and written presentation that captures the major aspects of the report in a succinct manner.

•      Consider all aspects of PMBOK and apply those that are relevant. Please use PMBOK 6th edition. Do not use PMBOK 7th edition.

•      Conduct your own research to support your arguments and to understand the project context.

•      Apply a structure to each section of your report to guide the reader and demonstrate you have applied a comprehensive and systematic approach.

•      You are required to use third-party references to support your arguments for question 3 above.

A useful starting point for online research is Google Scholar, scholar.google.com. If you are working off-campus you can access Google Scholar from the university library webpage and access articles and other resources:http://www.library.usyd.edu.au/databases/

Remember the instructions for scientific writing, particularly referencing!

Part 2 (6 marks)

Application of analytical techniques in professional project management

Critical Path Analysis

Axis Corporation is an innovative firm. Leveraging on its capabilities in adopting artificial intelligence to meet customer needs, the firm has recently designed a new model of “intelligent” vacuum cleaners. You are asked to lead a marketing campaign for the new product. Axis will be a new entrant to the vacuum cleaner market which is highly competitive. Details of activities involved in the project are given in the following table.

Activity

ID

Activity

Predecessor

Estimated

duration (days)

1

Get budget for the

campaign approved

5

2

Select campaign staff

1

3

3

Train campaign staff

2

3

4

Develop alternative

marketing themes

1

8

5

Evaluate and select the marketing theme

3, 4

5

6

Produce the campaign material

5

12

7

Get the campaign material approved

6

3

8

Select the communication channel

5

4

9

Launch campaign

7, 8

3

4(a) Draw a network diagram using the activity on node (AON) notation representing the   project. What is the critical path and how long is it? You may use PowerPoint to draw the diagram and then copy it into your assignment document. You should not use

Microsoft Project or any other project management software for this part of the assignment. (4 marks)

4(b) In the context of the above project, explain key benefits in managing a project using

critical path. Please use appropriate references to support your explanation. (2 marks)

Presentation requirements for Q4(a)

•     Prepare network diagram for the project including identification and measurement of

critical path - including evidence of having performed a forward and backward pass (i.e. include your workings, for example, in the form of a table).

•     Make sure you identify the critical path and its duration in your answer.

MARKING GUIDELINES

Part 1

Q1 (6 marks)

<3 marks

3-4 marks

4-4.5 marks

4.5-5 marks

>5matks

Where and how

there is evidence of such a

methodology being applied and its

contribution.

Major weaknesses in justifications for

selecting PMBOK

area/process. The

evidence provided is limited and does not adequately support

the arguments. Weak analysis of the

contributions. Major weaknesses in clarity of the presentation.

PMBOK area/process selections need more justification. More

analysis and

supporting evidence are required.

Contributions require more specific details. The explanations are   provided but lack clear focus and structure.

Justification of the

PMBOK area/process selections is provided. The justification of the evidence used

requires more analysis and more analysis.

Arguments to support the contributions

require more critical analysis. The

presentation requires some more clarity or structure. Overall

good analysis.

Good justification of the PMBOK

area/process

selections. The

justification of the

evidence used is

clearly provided, but more specific

evidence will be

useful. The

contributions are

analysed, but some

more specific details

will be helpful. Overall, a very good analysis.

Excellent justification

of the PMBOK

area/process

selections and

succinct presentation of evidence. The

justification of the

evidence provided is well-argued. The

contributions are

critically analysed and articulated with

specific details.

Overall, a very clearly structured analysis

that is well presented.

Q2 (10 marks)

<5 marks

5-6.5 marks

6.5-7.5 marks

7.5-8.5 marks

>8.5matks

Where and how

such a

methodology might have helped avoid or mitigate

identified problems.

Major weaknesses in justifications for

selecting PMBOK

area/process. The

evidence provided is limited and does not adequately support

the arguments. Weak analysis of the

benefits. Major

weaknesses in clarity of the presentation.

PMBOK area/process selections need more justification. More

analysis and

supporting evidence are required. The

selection of tools

requires more specific justifications.

Arguments to support the benefits need

more specific details.

Moderate level of

weaknesses in

presentation or

structure.

Justification of the

PMBOK area/process selections is provided. The justification of the evidence used

requires more analysis and more analysis.