I have attached all the docs, please let me know if you need any more resources. Please deliver within the deadline.
Microsoft Word - PROJ6000_Assessment 3 brief_T3 Ticketing V5.0 21 Aug 2020 PROJ6000_Assessment 1 Brief_081118.Docx Page 1 of 5 ASSESSMENT BRIEF Subject Code and Title PROJ6000 Principles of Project Management Assessment Assessment 3 – Project Charter development Individual/Group Project Charter development Length 2,000 words Learning Outcomes Successful completion of this assignment will result in achievement of the following subject learning outcomes: 1. Understand PMBOK knowledge areas and process groups and their role, relevance and impact on project management best practice and PMI's Code of Ethics. 2. Critically compare and contrast project management approaches and their appropriateness for managing a variety of project types, including IT projects. 3. Apply appropriate project management (including IT project management) tools and techniques, paying particular attention to risk management. Submission By 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Sunday in the first week of Module 6 (week 11) Weighting 40% Total Marks 40 Marks Context: Project leadership is about inspiring the project team to do their best from the outset. This requires a combination of verbal and written communications and a range of applied leadership skills. One of the foundational documents that helps “kick-off” the project is the Project Charter. This is a document that describes the entire project in a short, succinct and presentable document that can be shared with project staff or other stakeholders to PROJ6000_Assessment 1 Brief_081118.Docx Page 2 of 5 commence the project in earnest. It also helps clarify the project context, the project team roles and the goals of the project. In this assessment you will be given a project case study to use in order to develop a Project Charter. Though all students will receive the same case study, it is expected that each student will think about the project from their own perspective as an up-and-coming project manager. Use your own style based on your critical thinking of what it means for you to lead a project. That will help you formulate your unique Project Charter. Instructions: 1. Read the case study provided by your lecturer. This will form the basis for your Project Charter, because you will assume that you are the project manager for this project. 2. After reading the case study start developing your project charter. This needs to be a 2000-word report (+/- 10%) and must use a minimum of 6 references (academic literature and industry publications. The case study is a 7th reference). 3. The Project Charter must include the following headings and be written as if you were presenting it to the project team that will build this project. You are the project manager. The contents of the Charter are: a. Background to the project b. Reasons for the project c. Project objectives d. Constraints, limitations and risks e. Leadership structure (project manager and his or her senior aides: list the roles and explain what each does in the project. You need to cite 4 roles) f. Project risks and their mitigation g. Project stakeholders and how to interact with them h. The vision of the project and the type of project team culture you wish to promote in your team Output and Submission: Submit your completed assessment by the end of the first week of Module 6 (Week 11) on Blackboard. Learning Resources: Elias, A. A. (2016). Stakeholder analysis for Lean Six Sigma project management. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma. https://lesa.on.worldcat.org/oclc/6862439489 Patanakul, P., Iewwongcharoen, B., & Milosevic, D. (2010). An empirical study on the use of project management tools and techniques across project life-cycle and their impact on project success. Journal of General management, 35(3), 41-66. PROJ6000_Assessment 1 Brief_081118.Docx Page 3 of 5 https://web.stevens.edu/ses/documents/fileadmin/documents/pdf/PeerasitPMtoolsandsuc cessPublished.pdf Assessment Criteria: The assessment will be graded using the Learning Rubrics below. This is an individual assignment and it is worth 40%. Learning Rubrics – Part A Assessment Attributes Fail (0-49) Pass (50-64) Credit (65- 74) Distinction (75-84) High Distinction (85- 100) Content, Audience and Purpose 25% Demonstrates no awareness of context and/or purpose of the assignment. Demonstrates limited awareness of context and/or purpose of the assignment Demonstrates consistent awareness of context and/or purpose of the assignment. Demonstrates an advanced and integrated understanding of context and/or purpose of the assignment. Consistently demonstrates a systematic and critical understanding of context and purpose of the assignment. Correct citation of key resources and evidence 25% Demonstrates inconsistent use of good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas. There are mistakes in the APA style. Demonstrates use of credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas, but these are not always explicit or well developed. There are no mistakes in the APA style. Demonstrates use of high quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas. There are no mistakes in the APA style. Demonstrates use of good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop arguments and statements. Shows evidence of wide scope within the organisation for sourcing evidence There are no mistakes in the APA style. Demonstrates use of high quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop arguments and position statements. Shows evidence of wide scope within and without the organisation for sourcing evidence There are no mistakes in the APA style. Effective written Communication 25% Difficult to understand with no logical/clear structure, poor flow of ideas, argument lacks supporting evidence. Audience cannot follow the line of reasoning. Information, arguments and evidence are presented in a way that is not always clear and logical. Information, arguments and evidence are well presented, mostly clear flow of ideas and arguments. Line of reasoning is easy to follow. Information, arguments and evidence are very well presented; the presentation is logical, clear and well supported by evidence. Demonstrates cultural sensitivity. Expertly presented; the presentation is logical, persuasive, and well supported by evidence, demonstrating a clear flow of ideas and arguments. Engages and sustains audience’s interest in the Line of reasoning is often difficult to follow. topic, demonstrates high levels of cultural sensitivity Effective use of diverse presentation aids, including graphics and multi-media. Knowledge and understanding 25% Limited understanding of required concepts and knowledge Key components of the assignment are not addressed. Knowledge or understanding of the field or discipline. Resembles a recall or summary of key ideas. Often conflates/confuses assertion of personal opinion with information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials. Thorough knowledge or understanding of the field or discipline/s. Supports personal opinion and information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials. Demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts. Highly developed understanding of the field or discipline/s. Discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading. Well demonstrated capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts. A sophisticated understanding of the field or discipline/s. Systematically and critically discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading. Mastery of concepts and application to new situations/further learning. Microsoft Word - Merck agency theory instructional case final publish.docx Resolving agency issues in client-contractor relationships 1 Resolving agency issues in client-contractor relationships: The Merck Innovation Center Christine Unterhitzenberger, Lancaster University and Dietmar Möller, Merck KGaA ABSTRACT The management of relationships has been acknowledged as a crucial element of project success. However, agency related issues such as goal conflict, information asymmetry or opportunistic behavior can make this a real challenge. Steven and Mark – program managers for One Global Headquarters at Merck – developed their own way on how to deal with this challenge in a complex and uncertain environment. This case study will provide unique insights into their approach and motivation. KEYWORDS: project management, agency theory, project success, principal agent relationship Fig.1 Merck Innovation Center and Emmanuel-Merck-Platz in Darmstadt, Germany (reproduced with permission from Esch (2018)) Resolving agency issues in client-contractor relationships 2 A FACELIFT FOR A 350-YEAR-OLD COMPANY