MGT213 The Project Lifecycle, Level 6, Credits 15, Version 1
© Southern Institute of Technology 2015
MGT213 ASSIGNMENT 1
| Activity Title: | Assignment 1: Case Study “A Day in the Life” |
| Paper Number and Title: |
MGT213 The Project Lifecycle Level 6, 15 credits, Version 1 |
| Assessed Learning Outcomes: 1, 2, 3 |
Define the scope of project management. Analyse the major models of project management. Critically evaluate these models in relation to their applicability to practice. |
| Conditions: | This is a compulsory assignment. It must be submitted and makes up 40% of your final result for this paper. The completed assignment is to be submitted to your facilitator via Blackboard by the due date. |
MGT213 The Project Lifecycle, Level 6, Credits 15, Version 1
© Southern Institute of Technology 2015
ASSIGNMENT INSTRUCTIONS
Word count: 2,500 with a maximum of 3,500 words
1. Read the case, A Day in the Life, at the end of Chapter 1 of your textbook.
2. Provide your analysis, with reference to what you’ve read about project management so
far, on the following:
How effective do you think Rachel is as a project manager given the evidence of the
case study? Give reasons for your answer.
How does Rachel’s day fit with your understanding of what project management is
all about? Give reasons for your answer.
What would you do differently? Give reasons for your answer.
3. You should use your textbook and the CHAOS article to assist you in answering this
question.
4. You are encouraged to refer to additional sources of information for this assignment.
5. Ensure that you reference all of your sources using the correct APA referencing
conventions.
6. Make sure you read the Marking Schedule below carefully before embarking on the
assignment. It will give you clear idea of what we are looking for in the submission.
MGT213 The Project Lifecycle, Level 6, Credits 15, Version 1
© Southern Institute of Technology 2015
Marking schedule
| Criteria | E (0-39) | D (40-49) | C (50-64) | B (65-79) | A (80-100) |
| Introduction: Introduce case study and include external references to enhance the discussion Weighting 10% |
Introduction does not offer only context for the subject to be discussed. Introduction not included about the case study. |
Introduction is weak and does not offer useful context for the subject to be discussed. Introduction is poorly structured about the case study. |
Satisfactory introduction with useful content about the subject to be discussed. Content is sound but not particularly well developed, structured or supported about the case study. |
Good introduction and well-presented and argued. Introduction is detailed, developed and supported with good evidence and detail about the case study. |
Exceptionally well presented introduction. High level of detail presented about case study, very well structured, presented with specific evidence and facts about the case study. |
| Literature review covering project planning Weighting 10% |
Content is not sufficient to determined understanding, does not offer discussion or ideas, no external referencing to support discussion, discussion is irrelevant. No discussion related to. |
Content is weak and does not offer useful discussion or relevant ideas, no external referencing to support discussion. Minimal discussion around. |
Discussion is sound and relevant, ideas are present but not particularly well developed or supported; some evidence of external references, discussion of a generic nature. Basic discussion around. |
Well-presented and argued; ideas are detailed, discussion supported by some external referencing and relevant facts and examples. Useful discussion covering. |
Exceptionally well presented and argued; ideas are comprehensive, well developed, discussion supported by appropriate external referencing, specific evidence and facts, relevant examples suggested. Well articulated overview covering. |
| Project management effectiveness: Discuss and give reasons about Rachel’s effectiveness as a project manager Weighting 10% |
No discussion related to project management effectiveness and no reasons why Rachel displayed these attributes. |
Minimal discussion around project management effectiveness and why Rachel displayed these attributes. |
Basic discussion around project management effectiveness and the reason why Rachel displayed these attributes. |
Useful discussion covering project management effectiveness and good reasons why Rachel displayed these attributes. |
Well-articulated discussion covering project management effectiveness and well formed reasons why Rachel displayed these attributes. |
| Project managers activities: Discuss and give reasons how Rachel’s day fits with understanding of what project management is all about Weighting 15% |
No discussion related the role of project management and no discussion covering Rachel’s approach. |
Minimal discussion around the role of project management and brief discussion covering Rachel’s approach. |
Basic discussion with some externally researched overview presented covering the role of project management and brief discussion covering Rachel’s approach. |
Useful discussion and externally researched overview presented covering the role of project management and informed discussion covering Rachel’s approach. |
Well-articulated and externally researched overview presented covering the role of project management and informed discussion covering Rachel’s approach. |
| Options to be more effective: As a project manager, discuss and give reasons about what you would do differently Weighting 20% |
No discussion on options that could be considered to be an effective project manager. |
Minimal discussion around options that could be considered to be an effective project manager. |
Basic discussion and a limited number of options that could be considered to be an effective project manager. |
Useful discussion together with useful options that could be considered to be an effective project manager. |
Well-articulated discussion together with logical options that could be considered to be an effective project manager. |
| Link to CHOAS article: Answers to the assignment questions must be referenced and linked to the discussion in the CHAOS article Weighting 15% |
No reference to CHAOS article. |
Minimal reference to CHAOS article. |
Assignment questions referenced to some aspects covered in the CHAOS article. |
Assignment questions cover a number of relevant aspects covered in the CHAOS article. |
Assignment questions are well-articulated and cover a number of relevant aspects covered in the CHAOS article. |
MGT213 The Project Lifecycle, Level 6, Credits 15, Version 1
© Southern Institute of Technology 2015
| Conclusion: Present an overview of assignment findings and lessons learned Weighting 10% |
Content is weak and does not offer useful discussion or relevant learnings, discussion is irrelevant. |
Content is weak and does not offer useful discussion or relevant ideas, no external referencing to support discussion, discussion is irrelevant. |
Discussion is sound and relevant, learnings have been included but are not particularly well developed or supported, discussion of a generic nature. |
Well-presented and argued; learnings are detailed and supported by relevant facts and examples. |
Exceptionally well presented and argued; Learnings are comprehensive, well developed, discussion is clear and there is evidence, facts and relevant examples are presented. |
| Writing Weighting 5% |
No consideration for presentation. Muddled writing that is very difficult to follow. Numerous grammatical errors. Multiple spelling errors. |
Acceptable presentation. Long winded and some clear writing presentation. Some grammatical errors. Multiple spelling errors. |
Tidy presentation. Mostly clear writing but at times long winded. Writing style lacks consideration. Few issues around grammar. Less than 5 spelling errors. |
Professional presentation. Clear writing mainly to the point. Considered writing style. Excellent grammar with only minor oversights. Less than 3 spelling errors. |
Polished presentation. Clear and concise writing. Mature and appropriate writing style. Excellent grammar, correct in all aspects. No spelling errors. |
| In-text citations and Reference list APA formatted Weighting 5% |
More than 5 errors. | 4-5 errors. | 2-3 errors. | 1 error. | No errors. |
The post MGT213 The Project Lifecycle appeared first on My Assignment Online.
Plagiarism Free Assignment Help
Expert Help With This Assignment — On Your Terms
✓ Native UK, USA & Australia writers
✓ Deadline from 3 hours
✓ 100% Plagiarism-Free — Turnitin included
✓ Unlimited free revisions
✓ Free to submit — compare quotes