strategic project managment

MBA641_T2_2019_Assessment_03.pdf

Home >Business & Finance homework help >Operations Management homework help >strategic project managment

Assessment Information

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA Copyright Regulations 1969 This material has been reproduced and communicated to you by or on behalf of Kaplan Business School pursuant to Part VB of the Copyright Act 1968 (‘Act’). The material

in this communication may be subject to copyright under the Act. Any further reproduction or communication of this material by you may be the subject of copyright protection

under the Act. Kaplan Business School is a part of Kaplan Inc., a leading global provider of educational services. Kaplan Business School Pty Ltd ABN 86 098 181 947 is a

registered higher education provider CRICOS Provider Code 02426B.

Assessment Information 3

Subject Code: MBA641

Subject Name: Strategic Project Management

Assessment Title: Assessment 3 – Performance Evaluation and Video Presentation

Weighting: 30%

Total Marks: Time Limit: Submission:

30 15 minutes Upload video to Vimeo

Due Date: Tuesday of Week 13, 11.55pm AEST

Your task

Prepare a 15 minute video recording during which you evaluate the three case studies included below:

• Project A – DeGrandis Running Shoes

• Project B – Australian Olympic Committee (AOC) Partnership

• Project C – Ladybird Sporting Apparel

Assessment Description

In your Performance Evaluation Video Presentation, you must evaluate the performance of each of the three projects and provide the following:

a) Commentary on project alignment with strategic goals and ethical standards b) A Project Performance Scorecard (PPS) Snapshot c) Conclusions d) Recommendations

A PowerPoint template is provided for you to use in your video presentation if you wish. There is no requirement to use this template.

Assessment Instructions

Assessment 3 Case Study – DeGrandis Sporting Goods

1. Project A – DeGrandis Running Shoes

Project A introduced the DeGrandis private label running shoe to the company’s product range. Although the project ran over budget, the project team successfully developed a new sole cushioning technology and delivered a brand-new shoe within the project timeframe. Customers love the new shoes - they are outselling rival international brands - and sales have increased company revenues by over $5 million. The editor of online running shoe reviewer Shoe News has given the running shoes a 5 out of 5-star rating.

Assessment Information

in this communication may be subject to copyright under the Act. Any further reproduction or communication of this material by you may be the subject of copyright protection

under the Act. Kaplan Business School is a part of Kaplan Inc., a leading global provider of educational services. Kaplan Business School Pty Ltd ABN 86 098 181 947 is a

registered higher education provider CRICOS Provider Code 02426B.

But not everybody is so thrilled with the project’s outcomes. The board of directors is unhappy that the project team did not consult them about the Chinese organisation selected to manufacture and supply the shoes. Had the directors known that the Chinese supplier uses child labour in their factory they would not have approved the supply agreement because engaging partners that rely on child labour is prohibited under the company’s Code of Conduct. The consultants are managed by regional managers in each city. 2. Project B - Australian Olympic Committee (AOC) Partnership

The primary objective of Project B was for DeGrandis Sporting Goods to become an official supplier of sporting equipment to the Australian Olympic Team. At the outset all key stakeholders were identified and consulted and a comprehensive list of project requirements was developed based on stakeholder needs. Apart from the project running six months over the scheduled project timeframe, every other project requirement was successfully met. The new partnership was established and sales are estimated to have increased by over $3 million.

The project was considered a resounding success until it emerged that the project sponsor, a member of the DeGrandis senior executive team, had paid a high-ranking AOC official an incentive payment to approve the partnership. The press learned of the bribe and the incident became a public scandal. DeGrandis Sporting Goods suffered reputational damage as the company’s Code of Conduct expressly prohibits the payment of bribes to generate business. An extensive marketing campaign originally developed to promote the partnership has been cancelled because it would only draw more attention to the bribery scandal.

3. Project C – Ladybird Sporting Apparel

Project C successfully introduced the environmentally friendly and internationally known Ladybird brand of sporting apparel to the DeGrandis Sporting Goods product range. Although fundamental project requirements such as project timeframe and budget were met, the new line of clothing was not properly market tested prior to the product line launch. It turns out that customers consider the Ladybird clothing range to be inferior in quality and customer complaints have increased as a result.

DeGrandis Sporting Goods have ceased ordering new stock from Ladybird due to poor sales and increasing customer dissatisfaction.

You are required to use at least 15 sources of information and use Kaplan Harvard Referencing Style. Wikipedia and other ‘popular’ sites are not to be used.

Assessment Submission

This file must be submitted as a ‘Word’ or ‘PDF’ document to avoid any technical issues that may occur from incorrect file format upload. Uploaded files with a virus will not be considered as a legitimate submission. Turnitin will notify you if there is an issue with the submitted file. In this case, you must contact your lecturer via email and provide a brief description of the issue and a screenshot of the Turnitin error message.

You are also encouraged to submit your work well in advance of the deadline to avoid any possible

Assessment Information

in this communication may be subject to copyright under the Act. Any further reproduction or communication of this material by you may be the subject of copyright protection

under the Act. Kaplan Business School is a part of Kaplan Inc., a leading global provider of educational services. Kaplan Business School Pty Ltd ABN 86 098 181 947 is a

registered higher education provider CRICOS Provider Code 02426B.

delay with the Turnitin similarity report or any other technical difficulties.

Late assignment submission penalties

Penalties will be imposed on late assignment submissions in accordance with Kaplan Business School

“late assignment submission penalties” policy.

Number of days

Penalty

1* - 9 days 5% per day for each calendar day late deducted from the total marks available

10 - 14 days 50% deducted from the total marks available.

After 14 days Assignments that are submitted more than 14 calendar days after the due date will not be accepted, and the student will receive a mark of zero for the assignment(s).

Note Notwithstanding the above penalty rules, assignments will also be given a mark of zero if they are submitted after assignments have been returned to students

*Assignments submitted at any stage within the first 24 hours after the deadline will be considered to be one day late and therefore subject to the associated penalty

For more information, please read the full policy via https://www.kbs.edu.au/wp- content/uploads/2016/07/KBS_FORM_Assessment-Policy_MAR2018_FA.pdf

Important Study Information

Academic Integrity Policy KBS values academic integrity. All students must understand the meaning and consequences of cheating, plagiarism and other academic offences under the Academic Integrity and Conduct Policy. What is academic integrity and misconduct? What are the penalties for academic misconduct? What are the late penalties? How can I appeal my grade? Click here for answers to these questions: http://www.kbs.edu.au/current-students/student-policies/.

Study Assistance Students may seek study assistance from their local Academic Learning Advisor or refer to the resources on the MyKBS Academic Success Centre page. Click here for this information.

https://www.kbs.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/KBS_FORM_Assessment-Policy_MAR2018_FA.pdf

http://www.kbs.edu.au/current-students/student-policies/

https://elearning.kbs.edu.au/course/view.php?id=1481

reproduction or communication of this material by you may be the subject of copyright protection under the Act. Kaplan Business School is a part of Kaplan Inc., a leading global provider of educational services. Kaplan Business School Pty Ltd ABN 86

098 181 947 is a registered higher education provider CRICOS Provider Code 02426B.

MBA641 Strategic Project Management – Assessment 3 Marking Rubric – 30% Criteria F (Fail)

0%-49%

P (Pass)

50%-64%

CR (Credit) 65%-

74%

D (Distinction)

75% - 84%

HD (High Distinction)

85%-100%

Mark

Performance Evaluation Video Presentation Strategy & Ethics

Brief and inaccurate analysis

indicating poor understanding

strategic project management

concepts.

Demonstrated understanding of

strategic project management

concepts. Mostly accurate

analysis based upon appropriately identified strategic goals and

ethical standards.

Meaningful analysis based upon

accurately identified strategic goals

and ethical standards indicating

strong understanding of strategic

project management concepts.

Comprehensive understanding of

strategic project management

concepts evident from highly

accurate analysis incorporating all

relevant strategic goals and ethical

standards.

Demonstrated advanced level

understanding of strategic project

management concepts. Analysis is

penetrating and insightful with

findings that go beyond

fundamental strategic goals and

ethical standards outlined in the

case study.

Performance Evaluation Video Presentation Project Performance Scorecard (PPS)

Project Performance Scorecard

(PPS) either unclear or not used at

all indicating poor understanding

of project performance evaluation

model.

Demonstrated understanding of

project performance evaluation

model. Project Performance

Scorecard (PPS) is reasonably

clear and incorporates the

essential features of the basic

model.

Project Performance Scorecard

(PPS) correctly used to accurately

score and explain PPS Dimensions

indicating strong understanding of

project performance evaluation

model.

Comprehensive understanding of

project performance evaluation model evident from highly

accurate scoring and explanation

of PPS Dimensions in Project Performance Scorecard (PPS)

Demonstrated advanced level

understanding of project

performance evaluation model.

Project Performance Scorecard

(PPS) is clear, easy to interpret and

incorporates features that go

beyond the basic model.

Performance Evaluation Video Presentation Conclusions

Conclusions demonstrate poor

understanding of strategic

project management concepts.

Explanations for conclusions not

provided or unclear or illogical.

Conclusions demonstrate

reasonable understanding of

strategic project management

concepts. Meaningful

explanations for appropriate

conclusions provided in mostly

comprehensible language.

Conclusions demonstrate solid

understanding of strategic project

management concepts. Relevant

explanations for logical conclusions

provided in comprehensible

language.

Conclusions demonstrate

comprehensive understanding of

strategic project management

concepts. Proficient explanations for effective

conclusions provided in clear

language.

Conclusions demonstrate advance

level understanding of strategic

project management concepts.

Detailed explanations for insightful

conclusions provided in clear and

concise language.

Performance Evaluation Video Presentation Recommendations

Recommendations demonstrate

poor understanding of strategic

project management concepts.

Explanations for commendations

not provided or unclear or illogical.

Recommendations demonstrate

reasonable understanding of

strategic project management

concepts. Meaningful

explanations for appropriate

recommendations provided in

mostly comprehensible language.

Recommendations demonstrate

solid understanding of strategic

project management concepts.

Relevant explanations for logical

recommendations provided in

comprehensible language.

Recommendations demonstrate

comprehensive understanding of

strategic project management

concepts. Proficient explanations

for effective recommendations

provided in clear language.

Recommendations demonstrate

advanced level understanding of

strategic project management

concepts. Detailed explanations for

innovative recommendations

provided in clear and concise

language.

098 181 947 is a registered higher education provider CRICOS Provider Code 02426B.

Criteria F (Fail)

0%-49%

P (Pass)

50%-64%

CR (Credit) 65%-

74%

D (Distinction)

75% - 84%

HD (High Distinction)

85%-100%

Mark

Answer clearly and logically

presented Serious lack of organization.

Content of slides or notes pages

does not refer back to or relate to

main arguments. Writing is

formulaic, i.e. “in conclusion,”

“another example is….”

Writing style could be more

effective. Organization is hard to

follow; there is little progression

of ideas. Little or no transitions

between slides. Need to more

effectively weave main arguments

throughout.

Slides are generally well organized.

Better transitions needed. The

progression of ideas could be more

thoughtful. Slides and note relate

back to main arguments to prove

argument.

Ideas & arguments are well

structured. Thoughtful progression

of ideas and details. Sound

transitions between slides and notes

pages. Major arguments are

effectively made.

Ideas & arguments are effectively

structured. Thoughtful progression

of ideas and details. Excellent

transitions between slides and

notes. Concluding comments leave

the reader thinking. Major

arguments are effectively woven

throughout everybody slides, with

ideas always related back to main

arguments.

Appropriate theory and

research used to answer

question posed

The critique does not have

appropriate structure and lacks direction. No significant

observations made from appropriate

theory and research. Poor writing

and expression of arguments.

Reasonable critique which

examines the relevant issues and

makes reasonable observations

made from appropriate theory and

research. Reasonable writing and

expression of arguments.

Good critique examines the relevant

issues and makes good observations

from appropriate theory and

research. Good writing and

expression of arguments.

A very good critique -considers all

the relevant issues and makes

important observations from

appropriate theory and research.

Very good writing and expression

of arguments.

Fully considers all the relevant

issues and makes significant

observations from appropriate

theory and research. Excellent

writing and expression of

arguments.

Correct academic writing

style used, including correct

spelling, grammar and

punctuation

Needs more sentence variety. Little

or no thought given to diction. Tone

or language is conversational.

Contains much informal language.

Uses “I” or “you.” Contains many examples of

unclear or awkward phrasing.

Needs more sentence variety.

Attention needed with diction.

Contains informal language or

conversational tone or uses “I” or

“you.” Unclear or awkward sentence

phrasing.

Sentence variety is adequate. Tone

is appropriate. Diction is clear but

could be more effective. Language

is academic, and writing is clear and

effective. Very little or no unclear or

awkward phrasing.

Sentence variety is effective and

good. Tone is appropriate and

consistent. Diction/ vocabulary is

appropriate and effective. Language

is academic. Writing is clear and

concise.

Sentence variety is effective and

sophisticated. Tone is appropriate and consistent. Diction/

vocabulary is sophisticated and

effective. Language is

academically sound. Writing is

clear, concise, and strong.

Format of answer consistent

with question requirements

and KBS guidelines

No efforts made to follow

submission and editing, spacing, etc

requirements.

Meets most editing, spacing, fonts, and other editing

requirements. Some

requirements not met.

Meets editing, spacing, fonts, and

other editing requirements. Meets almost all editing,

spacing, fonts, and other

editing requirements.

Meets all editing, spacing, fonts, and

other editing requirements. /1

In-text referencing and

reference list follows

Harvard style and consistent

with KBS guidelines

Inappropriate referencing. Not

in-line with requirements of

Harvard style and consistent with

KBS guidelines.

Reasonably appropriate referencing,

generally in-line with requirements

of Harvard style and consistent with

KBS guidelines.

Good referencing, largely in line

with requirements of Harvard

style and consistent with KBS

guidelines.

Very good referencing, 100%

in-line with requirements of

Harvard style and consistent

with KBS guidelines.

Excellent/appropriate referencing,

100% in-line with requirements of

Harvard style and consistent with

KBS guidelines.

Video presentation is within +

/ - 10% of time requirement Video presentation is within + /

- more than 15% of time

requirement

Video presentation is within +

/ - 15% of time requirement Video presentation is within + / -

10% of time requirement Video presentation is within + / - 5%

of time requirement Video presentation is

within + / - 0% of

time requirement

Comments:

/24

/30