Project and Portfolio Management

Page 1 of 7

PRM7004

Project and Portfolio Management

Case Study Assignment

Date for Submission: Please refer to the timetable on ilearn

(The submission portal on ilearn will close at 14:00 UK time on the

date of submission)

Page 2 of 7

Assignment Brief

As part of the formal assessment for the programme you are required to submit a Project

and Portfolio Management assessment. Please refer to your Student Handbook for full

details of the programme assessment scheme and general information on preparing and

submitting assignments.

Learning Outcomes:

After completing the module, you should be able to:

1. Critically evaluate how Project and Portfolio Management planning and control

principles can be applied as a framework to deliver robust change beneficial to the

organisation and / or its customers

2. Analyse Project Management strategies and approaches including project

management methodologies, financial planning and IPR principles and regulation

3. Demonstrate a critical understanding of the personal skills and competencies of a

professional project manager.

4. Apply appropriate techniques for planning and scheduling including risk assessment

5. Assess risk factors and identify opportunities for mitigation within an applied example

6. Demonstrate ability to effectively monitor and control project implementation

including team management skills to achieve project success criteria and

stakeholder priorities

7. Professional Skills: Perform effectively within the professional environment. Work

within a team, demonstrating interpersonal skills such as effective listening,

negotiating, persuading and presentation. Be flexible and adaptable to changes

within the professional environment.

Maximum word count: 5,000 words

Please note that exceeding the word count by over 10% will result in a reduction in grade by

the same percentage that the word count is exceeded.

You must not include your name in your submission because Arden University operates

anonymous marking, which means that markers should not be aware of the identity of the

student. However, please do not forget to include your STU number.

Page 3 of 7

Assessment Task

Crossrail Limited (CRL), established in 2001, is a company that has been set up to build the

new railway that will become known as the Elizabeth line when it opens through central

London. The project was approved in 2007 and estimated to cost £15.4 billion, in December

2018 it was announced that the project would require a £1.4 billion bailout. The project has

encountered various Project and Portfolio Management challenges aside from cost and time

overruns.

Consider that you have just been appointed as a Portfolio Management consultant-analyst at

Crossrail Ltd. (CRL), reporting directly to the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), to conduct a

strategic evaluation of its Portfolio Management to determine how these may be better

managed to maintain and increase the company’s resilience and competitiveness - both now

and into the future.

Whilst using the Crossrail Ltd. (CRL) as your context, you do not need to demonstrate

knowledge of the approaches actually taken in this case study, but to consider what a Portfolio

Manager would consider and their possible approaches to the following:

Note: Use the learning materials provided in the module as the core for your answer,

supplemented by reading materials from authoritative sources (EBSCO, Google Scholar etc.),

information gathered during research of Portfolio Management at the CRL business

organisation and your own research more generally from the Internet.

Page 4 of 7

Question 1

Critically evaluate how project and portfolio management techniques can be used to effectively

plan, monitor and control the development of the railway project. Your answer should include an

analysis of strategies and approaches including Project Management methodologies, financial

planning and any intellectual property considerations which may need to be taken into

consideration whilst planning and implementing the portfolio of work.

(2,000 words)

(40 Marks)

(LO: 1, 2 & 6)

Question 2

Identify and discuss an appropriate technique for risk assessment, planning and scheduling of

the projects and portfolio in the above case study. Include an assessment of key areas of risks

and how you might mitigate two of the key risks identified.

(1,500 words)

(30 Marks)

(LO: 4 & 5)

Question 3

Make recommendations regarding how you as a Portfolio Manager would handle the

successful development of the railway project. Include an assessment of the critical personal

skills and competencies needed for undertaking a project of this size and team management

skills to achieve project success criteria that meet the stakeholder’s priorities.

(750 words)

(15 Marks)

(LO: 3, 6)

Question 4

Big projects tend to introduce sudden changes that could be viewed as threats by employees.

Reflect how you have in the past managed change within a team. Demonstrate interpersonal

skills such as effective listening, negotiating, persuading and presentation in this context.

(750 words)

(15 Marks)

(LO: 7)

Page 5 of 7

Formative Feedback

You have the opportunity to submit a partial draft of your report to receive formative feedback.

The feedback is designed to help you develop areas of your work and it helps you develop your

skills as an independent learner.

Your work must be submitted to your tutor in accordance with instructions on the assessment page in iLearn no later than the date specified. This is to allow time for you to reflect on the feedback and draft your final submission.

Formative feedback will not be given to work submitted after the specified date.

Student Guidelines

Development of academic skills:

You MUST underpin your analysis and evaluation of the key issues with appropriate and

wide ranging academic research and ensure this is referenced using the AU Harvard

system. The My Study Skills Area contains the following useful resources:

Guide to Harvard Referencing

http://moodle.bl.rdi.co.uk/guides/HarvardRef/AU_Harvard_Quick_Ref_Guide.pdf

Guide to Harvard Citation

http://moodle.bl.rdi.co.uk/guides/HarvardRef/AU_Guide_to_Harvard_Citation.pdf

You must use the AU Harvard Referencing method in your assignment.

Word Count:

Students are required to indicate the exact word count on the title page of the assessment.

The word count excludes the title page, executive summary, tables, figures, diagrams,

footnotes, reference list and appendices. Where assessment questions have been

reprinted from the assessment brief these will also be excluded from the word count. ALL

other printed words ARE included in the word count. See ‘Word Count Policy’ on the

homepage of this module for more information.

Page 6 of 7

Submission Guidance

Assignments submitted late will not be accepted and will be marked as a 0% fail.

Your assessment should be submitted as a single Word (MS Word) or PDF file. For more

information please see the “Guide to Submitting an Assignment” document available on the

module page on iLearn.

You must ensure that the submitted assignment is all your own work and that all sources

used are correctly attributed. Penalties apply to assignments which show evidence of

academic unfair practice. (See the Student Handbook which is on the homepage of your

module and also in the Induction Area).

Assessment Criteria: Level 7 (Learning objectives covered - all)

Level 7 is characterised by an expectation of students’ expertise in their specialism. Students are semi-autonomous, demonstrating independence in the

negotiation of assessment tasks (including the major project) and the ability to evaluate, challenge, modify and develop theory and practice. Students are

expected to demonstrate an ability to isolate and focus on the significant features of problems and to offer synthetic and coherent solutions, with some students

producing original or innovative work in their specialism that is potentially worthy of publication by Arden University. A clear appreciation of ethical

considerations (as appropriate) is also a prerequisite.

Grade

Mark

Bands Generic Assessment Criteria

Distinction 70%+

Excellent analysis of key issues and concepts/. Excellent development of conceptual structures and argument, making consistent

use of scholarly conventions. Excellent research skills, independence of thought, an extremely high level of intellectual rigour and

consistency, exceptional expressive / professional skills, and substantial creativity and originality. Excellent academic/intellectual skills. Work pushes the boundaries of the discipline and demonstrates an awareness of relevant ethical considerations. Work may

be considered for publication by Arden university

Merit 60-69%

Very good level of competence demonstrated. High level of theory application. Very good analysis of key issues and concepts.

Development of conceptual structures and argument making consistent use of scholarly conventions. Some evidence of original

thought and a general awareness of relevant ethical considerations

Pass 50-59%

A satisfactory to good performance. Basic knowledge of key issues and concepts. Generally descriptive, with restricted analysis of existing scholarly material and little argument development. Use of scholarly conventions inconsistent. The work lacks original thought. Some awareness of relevant ethical considerations. Satisfactory professional skills (where appropriate).

Marginal Fail

40-49%

Limited research skills impede use of learning resources and problem solving. Significant problems with structure/accuracy in expression. Very weak academic / intellectual / professional skills. Limited use of scholarly conventions. Errors in expression and the work may lack structure overall.

Fail 39% and below

A poor performance in which there are substantial gaps in knowledge and understanding, underpinning theory and ethical considerations. Little evidence of research skills, use of learning resources and problem solving. Major problems with structure/ accuracy in expression. Professional skills not present. Very weak academic / intellectual / professional skills. No evidence of use of scholarly conventions.