Commercial Project Negotiation unit for project managers - Presentation and Written Assessment
harik
PresentationScript.docxPresentation Assessment Criteria
In the unit profile. It says... Your presentation will be assessed on the extent and quality to which it meets each of the following criteria.
1. A description and discussion of the operation of the operation of diverse and complex government and non-government project contractual arrangements relevant to a range of managed services, ICT, and build agreements? (20%)
1. An explanation of common arguments using logic, persuasion and influence factors as commonly applied to conflicting and/or competing stakeholder agendas? (20%)
1. Critical analysis of methods of project negotiation, conflict management, and stakeholder engagement across projects consisting of differing technology standards and asset lifecycles? (20%)
1. Appropriate and well structured, concise and clear expression of project management arguments in response to the assessment task? (5%)
1. A clear flow of thought throughout the presentation with a clear purpose described in the introduction and a comprehensive conclusion? (5%)
1. A critical review and integration of relevant academic and professional literature (cited at least twenty (20) times)? (10%)
1. Clarity of expression, grammar and spelling? (5%)
1. Strict conformity to CQUniversity Australia Harvard Referencing Guide? (5%)
1. Appropriate presentation format and presented within slide and note/script limit: 10 to 20 slides & notes/script? (10%)
So, the first four items (65%) (numbers have been given here whereas they are bullets in the unit profile) are the ones that consist of course material and the student’s thoughts. The remainder (35%) is about the way that they present and have put together the written notes.
So, for criteria (1) students could compare and contrast two sample organisations, such as the Channel Tunnel and maybe a government organisation (QLD Health would do). They can, of course, use other organisations if they are more familiar with them. Students don't have to be an expert in the organisations and could use their imagination supplemented by the material they've seen in the unit. The main purpose of this criteria (1) is to allow them to set the scene around the organisations and give them the basis of being able to compare and contrast.
Criteria (2) allows them to bring the common ideas in that underpin and influence negotiation. Then criteria (3) allows them to critique the suggestions and research made by the authors on the course. Finally, criteria (4) says that they should talk in a project management context about the examples and material.
But in simple terms start with Channel Tunnel and QLD Health. Then say that negotiation is based on these ideas - logic, persuasion and influence - but influenced by stakeholder agendas. All the time try to give examples - for instance in Channel Tunnel this happened... whereas in QLD Health they do that....
Then explain the range of research using the authors we've looked at on the course. Finally explain how things might differ depending on the organisation and stage of the project and asset life cycle. Again, use explanations from Channel Tunnel and QLD Health.
Then at the end make a conclusion - this can be whatever the students think, but should make sense in the context of what they've said in their presentation.
Channel tunnel wiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Channel_Tunnel
