Project management

BBA222 PROJECT MANAGEMENT Task brief & rubrics

Task

A Hotel have an interest in creating a new grading system for their customers. This is critical as the hotel wants to delivery high standard satisfaction outcomes to improve and standardize the quality of the service they deliver and to have the possibility to partnership with other hotels in the region. The new system ideally should assess fairly the employees, and the suppliers.
· Analyze the main clients and stakeholders (competitors, customers, suppliers) and build a research method to assess the actual picture of satisfaction of all stockholders. This method will assess the new grading system as soon as the project is put into practice in the hotel.
· Identify and prepare the information to convince your boss that your project makes sense, and it is necessary to put into practice. You need to be convincing.
· Create a project team: tell how you are going to create your team and how you will coordinate it.
· Build up a Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) with all the tasks and their duration, resources needed and predecessors.
· Establish a Project Timing and determine how long will be the project and the critical path.
· Estimate a Project Budget (and a justification).
· Assess on the risks of failure.

Formalities

· Individual work.
· Minimum length of the assignment 1500 words – Maximum 2500 words.
· Relate your work to the concepts delivered in class.
· Font: Arial 12,5pts. Line-spacing: default. Text-align: Justified.
· Bibliography/References, if needed, has to be quoted in Harvard style.
· You may use Appendixes. These and the References do not count for the total wordcount.

It assesses the following learning outcomes:

· Describe the need for a project-based approach inside organizations.
· Understand the role of project management as a strategic element inside organizations.
· Critically assess the roles and responsibilities of a project manager
· Evaluate how to select, develop, plan, schedule and measure its outcomes and risks.

Rubrics

Exceptional

90-100

Good

80-89

Fair

70-79

Fail

<70 Critical analysis (25%) Student effectively assesses the impact of project on the company. Student engages with theory/data in a critical manner. Student fairly assesses the impact of project on the company. Students attempt to engage with theory/data in a critical manner. Student fairly assesses the impact of project on the company, although some key aspects might be missing. Student may be unsuccessful in attempts to engage critically with theory/data. Student fail to assesses the impact of project on the company, although some key aspects might be missing. Student makes no attempt to engage with theory/data in a critical manner. Critical evaluation (25%) Student effectively engages in critical evaluation of all aspects presented in the brief. Student makes a good attempt at engaging in critical evaluation of most aspects presented in the brief. Student makes a fair attempt at engaging in critical evaluation of some aspects presented in the brief (argument might be weak). Student makes an insufficient attempt to critically evaluate aspects presented in the brief. Critical discussion & formulation of solutions (25%) Student effectively leads discussion towards strong theory/data-driven solutions. Student makes a good attempt at leading discussion towards theory/data-driven solutions. Student makes a fair attempt at leading discussion towards theory/data-driven solutions. Student fails to lead discussion towards relevant solutions. Communication (25%) Student includes all relevant sections, meeting professional standards of presentation. Correct referencing format. Student includes all relevant sections, but falls short of professional standards of presentation. Largely correct referencing format. Student includes most relevant sections, but falls short of professional standards of presentation. Some incorrect referencing. Student fails to submit several relevant sections and/or falls significantly short of professional presentation standards. Largely incorrect referencing format.