Chat with us, powered by LiveChat The assignment we have to do now is ‘PART- B’ i.e. Change Control. It is a total of 5000 words. that is a group work for whi - School Writers

The assignment we have to do now is ‘PART- B’ i.e. Change Control. It is a total of 5000 words. that is a group work for whi

 The assignment we have to do now is "PART- B" i.e. Change Control. It is a total of 5000 words. that is a group work for which we are 5 members and each member has to do 1000 words. Please refer to the case study and state necessary changes for the profit of the company.
refer he case study I attached and read the instructions carefully. i have already done part – A, so dont worry about it. just you need to focus on part B- Change control. 

PROJ6003_Assessment 1 Brief_July 2019.Docx Page 1 of 9

ASSESSMENT BRIEF

Subject Code and Title PROJ6003 Project Execution and Control

Assessment Assessment 1: Change Management (2 parts)

Part A: Module 1-2 Discussion Forum

Part B: Change Control

Individual/Group Part A: Individual

Part B: Individual/Group

Length Part A: 750 words

Part B: 1500 words/student

Learning Outcomes 1. Draw on tools and techniques of sourcing project data, develop a range of processes and measures to manage scope, change and quality on complex global projects.

Submission Part A: Post by end of Module 2.

Part B: By 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Sunday end of Module 3

Weighting 50% (Part A: 15%; Part B: 35%)

Total Marks Part A: 15 marks

Part B: 35 marks

Context:

During project execution, project managers ensure that project work is completed as specified in the Project Management Plan and according to project requirements. Requirements may change throughout the course of a project. Changes need to be controlled, ensuring all of their impacts upon the project are managed effectively and are incorporated into existing management plans and project baselines.

The process of directing and managing project work requires project managers to take on numerous responsibilities and to exhibit characteristics such as attention to detail, constant communication and effective leadership.

Instructions:

For this Assessment refer to the assessment case study found in Key Learning Resources.

PROJ6003_Assessment 1 Brief_July 2019.Docx Page 2 of 9

There are two parts for this assessment: 1 Discussion Forum (Part A) that prepares students to write a Change Management Plan (Part B).

Each student will construct an initial response in approximately 500 words to the following questions

and post on the Module discussion forums. Students will be graded individually on how students

demonstrate/share project change management theories and contribute to the general discussion of

the topic over weeks 2, 3 & 4 as well as their 250-words written response. The initial and responding

posts must be submitted by the end of Module 2 (Total 750 words).

Part A: Module 1-2 Discussion Forums

Managing Project Changes

Why is change management a necessary component of project management? Consider the given case

study, critically analyse and identify key issues that could lead to any necessary changes in the project.

What processes or strategies do you think would work best to perform the identified change requests

from the case study?

Output:

Part A – Complete your posts by the end of Module 2.

Part B: Change Control

Based upon the given case study, in groups or as an individual, develop a report on change control. In the report:

1. Identify changes required for the case study. Critically analyse their impact on scope, time, cost, quality of the project and the techniques used to manage them.

2. Explain what processes are involved in submitting a request to deal with the changes necessary from your analysis of the case study.

3. Identify and discuss options to satisfy each change request and any risks associated to the options.

4. Complete the change request/control form provided or one that is used from a workplace.

The written part of your change control report should consist of 1500 words/student.

If you work in group, nominate a group leader and this group leader will submit the assessment on behalf of the group.

Output: Complete and submit your change control report by the end of Module 3.

PROJ6003_Assessment 1 Brief_July 2019.Docx Page 3 of 9

Learning Resources:

Heldman, K. (2013). PMP Project Management Professional Exam Study Guide (7th ed.). Indianapolis, IN: Wiley

 Chapter 8: Developing the Project Team (Read the section on ‘Directing and Managing Project Work’)

 Chapter 10: Measuring and Controlling Project Performance (Read the section on ‘Managing Perform Integrated Change Control’)

 Chapter 11: Controlling Work Results (Read the sections from ‘Managing Cost Changes’ to and including ‘Validating Project Scope’)

ProjectLibre. (n.d.). ProjectLibre: Open source replacement of Microsoft Project [Software download]. Retrieved from http://www.projectlibre.org/home

Project Management Institute. (2013). A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK Guide®) (5th ed.). Newtown Square, Pennsylvania: Project Management Institute.

 Section 3.5: Executing Process Group

 Section 3.6: Monitoring and Controlling Process Group

 Section 4.3: Direct and Manage Project Work

 Section 4.4: Monitor and Control Project Work

 Section 4.5: Perform Integrated Change Control

 Section 5.5: Validate Scope

 Section 5.6: Control Scope

 Section 6.7: Control Schedule

 Section 7.4: Control Costs

 Section 11.6: Control Risks

Snyder, C. S. (2013). A project manager’s book of forms: A companion to the PMBOK guide (2nd ed.). Indianapolis, IN: Wiley.

 Change Log Template (Word document)

 Change Management Plan Template (Word document)

 Change Request Template (Word document)

Wysocki, R. K. (2012). Effective Project Management: Traditional, Agile, Extreme (6th ed.). Indianapolis, IN: Wiley.

 Chapter 6: How to Launch a TPM Project (sections ‘Recruiting the Project Team’ to ‘Assigning Resources’).

 Chapter 7: How to Monitor and Control a TPM (Read the sections from ‘Managing Project Status Meetings’ to and including ‘Putting It All Together’).

Assessment Criteria: Please refer to the following learning rubrics for assessment criteria on each part.

PROJ6003_assessment 1 brief_July 2019.docx Page 4 of 9

Learning Rubric – Assessment 1 Part A: Modules 1-2 Discussion Forums

Assessment Attributes

Fail (0-49)

Pass (50-64)

Credit (65-74)

Distinction (75-84)

High Distinction (85-100)

Contributes to identifying tools or techniques of sourcing project data and developing processes and measures to manage project change

60%

Fails to contribute to the identification of tools or techniques of sourcing data and/or developing processes and measures to manage project change.

Contributes an identification of tools or techniques of sourcing project data. Resembles a recall or summary of key ideas.

Contributes an identification of both tools and techniques of sourcing project data without citing evidence from the research or readings. Demonstrates capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts.

Contributes an identification of both tools and techniques of sourcing project data and analyses or evaluates their value towards the processes to measure and manage project change. Supports personal opinion and information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials.

Contributes an identification of both tools and techniques of sourcing project data and analyses or evaluates their value towards the processes to measure and manage project change, with added insight that extends knowledge available from sourced data. Critically discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials

Constructive feedback to peers 30%

Fails to offer any feedback. No support or encouragement to peers. No awareness or sensitivity to diversity amongst peers.

Offers feedback but rarely constructive or useful. Feedback is not always clear or specific to guide peers. Little support or encouragement to peers.

Offers feedback that is sometimes constructive or useful. Feedback is provided with examples to guide peers. Some support and encouragement to peers.

Offers constructive feedback regularly. Formulates the merits of alternative ideas or proposals and communicates them to peers.

Always offers detailed constructive feedback that is specific and appropriate. Expertly articulates the merits of alternative ideas or proposals and communicates them effectively to peers.

PROJ6003_assessment 1 brief_July 2019.docx Page 5 of 9

Demonstrates little awareness of and/or sensitivity to diversity amongst peers.

Demonstrates some level of awareness of and sensitivity to diversity amongst peers.

Offers support and encouragement to peers. Demonstrates a high level of awareness of and sensitivity to diversity amongst peers.

Provides expert assistance, support, and encouragement to peers. Consistently demonstrates a high level of awareness of and sensitivity to diversity amongst peers.

Use of academic and discipline conventions and sources of evidence 10%

Poorly written with errors in spelling, grammar. Demonstrates inconsistent use of good quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop ideas. There are mistakes in using the APA style.

Is written according to academic genre (e.g. with introduction, conclusion or summary) and has accurate spelling, grammar, sentence and paragraph construction. Demonstrates consistent use of credible and relevant research sources to support and develop ideas, but these are not always explicit or well developed. There are no mistakes in using the APA style.

Is well-written and adheres to the academic genre (e.g. with introduction, conclusion or summary). Demonstrates consistent use of high quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop ideas. There are no mistakes in using the APA style.

Is very well-written and adheres to the academic genre. Consistently demonstrates expert use of good quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop appropriate arguments and statements. Shows evidence of reading beyond the key reading There are no mistakes in using the APA style.

Expertly written and adheres to the academic genre. Demonstrates expert use of high-quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop arguments and position statements. Shows extensive evidence of reading beyond the key reading There are no mistakes in using the APA Style.

PROJ6003_assessment 1 brief_July 2019.docx Page 6 of 9

Learning Rubric – Assessment 1 Part B: Change Control Report

Assessment Attributes

Fail (0-49)

Pass (50-64)

Credit (65-74)

Distinction (75-84)

High Distinction (85-100)

Identifies and analyses change and its impacts to scope, time, cost and quality on global projects 35%

Fails to contribute to identifying or analysing change and its impact on the project

Contributes to identifying tasks required to implement change. Demonstrates limited awareness of possible implications of making change.

Minimal analysis of change impact

Contributes to identifying tasks and resources required to implement the change. Clearly articulates the impact of change on projects, identifying and analysing each of the key change contributors.

Contributes to identifying tasks and resources required to implement the change and estimating the time needed to complete those tasks. Contributes to presenting a coherent impact analysis. Contributes to identifying options to satisfy change and assessing their impact on project outcome and success

Contributes to identifying tasks and resources required to implement the change and provides a project schedule to complete those tasks. Develops a critical analysis and evaluation of the impact of change and examines associated risks involved Contributes to identifying options which are aligned with project outcome and stakeholder wishes, to satisfy change and assess impacts on project outcome and success. Contributes to formulating a process to forecast potential change to minimise it and develops a strategy to manage change and stakeholder

PROJ6003_assessment 1 brief_July 2019.docx Page 7 of 9

communications effectively.

Develops processes and measures to manage changes to scope, time, cost and quality on complex global projects. 40%

Fails to contribute to the development of processes and/or measures to manage changes to scope, time, cost and quality on complex global projects.

Identifies processes and measures to manage changes to scope, time, cost and quality on complex global projects but resembles a recall or summary of key ideas. Conflates/confuses assertion of personal opinion with information from the research/course materials.

Contributes to the development of processes and measures to manage changes to scope, time, cost and quality on complex global projects. Shows understanding of integrated change control. Supports personal opinion and information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials. Demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts.

Contributes to the development of processes and measures to manage changes to scope, time, cost and quality on complex global projects. Work shows insight and thorough understanding of integrated change control. Discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials. Well demonstrated capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts.

A sophisticated understanding of the development of processes and measures to manage changes to scope, time, cost and quality on complex global projects effectively and understanding of integrated change control. Critically discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials Critically applies concepts to new situations/further learning. Identifies a framework to foster a continuous improvement cycle of learning within the organisation.

PROJ6003_assessment 1 brief_July 2019.docx Page 8 of 9

Effectively communicates 20%

Difficult to understand for audience, no logical/clear structure, poor flow of ideas, argument lacks supporting evidence. No effort is made to keep audience engaged, audience cannot follow the line of reasoning. Little use of presentation aids, or the presentation aids and material used are irrelevant.

Information, arguments and evidence are presented in a way that is not always clear and logical. Attempts are made to keep the audience engaged, but not always successful. Line of reasoning is often difficult to follow. Presentation aids are used more for effect than relevance.

Information, arguments and evidence are well presented, mostly clear flow of ideas and arguments. The audience is mostly engaged, line of reasoning is easy to follow. Effective use of presentation aids.

Information, arguments and evidence are very well presented, the presentation is logical, clear and well supported by evidence. Engages the audience, demonstrates cultural sensitivity. Carefully and well prepared presentations aids are used.

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 topic, demonstrates high levels of cultural sensitivity Effective use of diverse presentation aids, including graphics and multi-media.

Uses academic and discipline conventions and sources of evidence 5%

Poorly written with errors in spelling, grammar. Demonstrates inconsistent use of good quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop ideas. There are mistakes in using the APA style.

Is written according to academic genre (e.g. with introduction, conclusion or summary) and has accurate spelling, grammar, sentence and paragraph construction. Demonstrates consistent use of credible and relevant research sources to support and develop ideas, but these are not

Is well-written and adheres to the academic genre (e.g. with introduction, conclusion or summary). Demonstrates consistent use of high quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop ideas. There are no mistakes in using the APA style.

Is very well-written and adheres to the academic genre. Consistently demonstrates expert use of good quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop appropriate arguments and statements. Shows evidence of reading beyond the key reading

Expertly written and adheres to the academic genre. Demonstrates expert use of high-quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop arguments and position statements. Shows extensive evidence of reading beyond the key reading

PROJ6003_assessment 1 brief_July 2019.docx Page 9 of 9

always explicit or well developed. There are no mistakes in using the APA style.

There are no mistakes in using the APA style.

There are no mistakes in using the APA Style.

,

At 6:00 P.M. on Thursday in late October 1998, Don Jung, an Atlay Company project manager (assigned to the Lyle contract) sat in his office thinking about the comments brought up during a meeting with his immediate superior earlier that afternoon. During that meeting Fred Franks, the supervisor of project managers, criticized Don for not promoting a cooperative attitude between him and the func- tional managers. Fred Franks had a high-level meeting with the vice presidents in charge of the various functional departments (i.e., engineering, construction, cost control, scheduling, and purchasing) earlier that day. One of these vice presidents, John Mabby (head of the purchasing department) had indicated that his depart- ment, according to his latest projections, would overrun their man-hour allocation by 6,000 hours. This fact had been relayed to Don by Bob Stewart (the project purchasing agent assigned to the Lyle Project) twice in the past, but Don had not seriously considered the request because some of the purchasing was now going to be done by the subcontractor at the job site (who had enough man-hours to cover this additional work). John Mabby complained that, even though the sub- contractor was doing some of the purchasing in the field, his department still would overrun its man-hour allocation. He also indicated to Fred Franks that Don Jung had better do something about this man-hour problem now. At this point in the meeting, the vice president of engineering, Harold Mont, stated that he had experienced the same problem in that Don Jung seemed to ignore their requests for additional man-hours. Also at this meeting the various vice presidents indicated

675

The Lyle Construction Project

c17.qxd 12/21/12 7:00 PM Page 675

that Don Jung had not been operating within the established standard company procedures. In an effort to make up for time lost due to initial delays that occurred in the process development stage of this project, Don and his project team had been getting the various functional people working on the contract to “cut cor- ners” and in many cases to buck the standard operating procedures of their respective functional departments in an effort to save time. His actions and the actions of his project team were alienating the vice presidents in charge of the functional departments. During this meeting, Fred Franks received a good deal of criticism due to this fact. He was also told that Don Jung had better shape up, because it was the consensus opinion of these vice presidents that his method of operating might seriously hamper the project’s ability to finish on time and within budget. It was very important that this job be completed in accordance with the Lyle requirements since they would be building two more similar plants within the next ten years. A good effort on this job could further enhance Atlay’s chances for being awarded the next two jobs.

Fred Franks related these comments and a few of his own to Don Jung. Fred seriously questioned Don’s ability to manage the project effectively and told him so. However, Fred was willing to allow Don to remain on the job if he would begin to operate in accordance with the various functional departments’ standard operating procedures and if he would listen and be more attentive to the com- ments from the various functional departments and do his best to cooperate with them in the best interests of the company and the project itself.

INCEPTION OF THE LYLE PROJECT

In April of 1978, Bob Briggs, Atlay’s vice president of sales, was notified by Lyle’s vice president of operations (Fred Wilson) that Atlay had been awarded the $600 million contract to design, engineer, and construct a polypropylene plant in Louisiana. Bob Briggs immediately notified Atlay’s president and other high- level officials in the organization (see Exhibit I). He then contacted Fred Franks in order to finalize the members of the project team. Briggs wanted George Fitz, who was involved in developing the initial proposal, to be the project manager. However, Fitz was in the hospital and would be essentially out of action for another three months. Atlay then had to scramble to appoint a project manager, since Lyle wanted to conduct a kickoff meeting in a week with all the principals present.

One of the persons most available for the position of project manager was Don Jung. Don had been with the company for about fifteen years. He had started with the company as a project engineer, and then was promoted to the position of manager of computer services. He was in charge of computer services for six months until he had a confrontation with Atlay’s upper management regarding the

676 THE LYLE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT

c17.qxd 12/21/12 7:00 PM Page 676

Exhibit I. Atlay and Company organization chart

CEO

Head of

Operations

VP Control

B. Knapp

VP Eng.

H. Mont

VP Purch.

J. Mabby

VP Const.

S. Russel

VP Sales

B. Briggs

Mgr. of

Proj. Mgrs.

F. Franks

Project

D. Jung

Project

Project

Process Civil Elect . Instr. Piping Scheduling Cost Control Buying Exped. Inspect. Traffic ProjectsMech.

R.. Begen R.. Stewart

677

c17.qxd 12/21/12 7:00 PM Page 677

policies under which the computer department was operating. He had served the company in two other functions since—the most recent position, that of being a senior project engineer on a small project that was handled out of the Houston office. One big plus was the fact that Don knew Lyle’s Fred Wilson per- sonally since they belonged to many of the same community organizations. It was decided that Don Jung would be the project manager and John Neber (an experi- enced project engineer) would be assigned as the senior project engineer. The next week was spent advising Don Jung regarding the contents of the proposal and determining the rest of the members to be assigned to the project team.

A week later, Lyle’s contingent arrived at Atlay’s headquarters (see Exhibit II). Atlay was informed that Steve Zorn would be the assistant project manager on this job for Lyle. The position of project manager would be left vacant for the time being. The rest of Lyle’s project team was then introduced. Lyle’s project team consisted of individuals from various Lyle divisions around the country, including Texas, West Virginia, and Philadelphia. Many of the Lyle project team members had met each other for the first time only two weeks ago.

During this initial meeting, Fred Wilson emphasized that it was essential that this plant be completed on time since their competitor was also in the process of preparing to build a similar facility in the same general location. The first plant finished would most likely be the one that would establish control over the south- western United States market for polypropylene material. Mr. Wilson felt that Lyle had a six-week head start over its competitor at the moment and would like

678 THE LYLE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT

Exhibit II. Lyle project team organizational chart

VP of Operations

F. Wilson

Project Mgr.

Asst. Project Mgr.

S. Zorn

Sr. Project Eng.

B. Dradfy

Const. Eng.

D. Able

Instru. Eng.

C. Short

Mech. Eng.

B. Henny

Elect. Eng.

J. Stert

Process Eng.

J. Tomkan

P rocure. Rep.

J. Bost

c17.qxd 12/21/12 7:00 PM Page 678

to increase that difference, if at all possible. He then introduced Lyle’s assistant project manager who completed the rest of the presentation.

At this initial meeting the design package was handed over to Atlay’s Don Jung so that the process engineering stage of this project could begin. This pack- age was, according to their inquiry letter, so complete that all material require- ments for this job could be placed within three months after project award (since very little additional design work was required by Atlay on this project). Two weeks later, Don contacted the lead process engineer on the project, Raphael Begen. He wanted to get Raphael’s opinion regarding the condition of the design package.

Begen: Don, I think you have been sold a bill of goods. This package is in bad shape.

Jung: What do you mean this package is in bad shape? Lyle told us that we would be able to have all the material on order within three months since this package was in such good shape.

Begen: Well in my opinion, it will take at least six weeks to straighten out the design package. Within three months from that point you will be able to have all the material on order.

Jung: What you are telling me then is that I am faced with a six-week sched- ule delay right off the bat due to the condition of the package.

Begen: Exactly.

Don Jung went back to his office after his conversation with the lead process engineer. He thought about the status of his project. He felt that Begen was being overly pessimistic and that the package wasn’t really all that bad. Besides, a month shouldn’t be too hard to make up if the engineering section would do its work quicker than normal and if purchasing would cut down on the amount of time it takes to purchase materials and equipment needed for this plant.

CONDUCT OF THE PROJECT

The project began on a high note. Two months after contract award, Lyle sent in a contingent of their representatives. These representatives would be located at Atlay’s headquarters for the next eight to ten months. Don Jung had arranged to have the Lyle offices set up on the other side of the building away from his project team. At first there were complaints from Lyle’s assistant project manager regarding the physical distance that separated Lyle’s project team and Atlay’s project team. However, Don Jung assured him that there just wasn’t any available space that was closer to the Atlay project team other than the one they were now occupying.

Conduct of the Project 679

c17.qxd 12/21/12 7:00 PM Page 679

The Atlay project team operating within a matrix organizational structure

plunged right into the project (see Exhibit III). They were made aware of the delay

that was incurred at the onset of the job (due to the poor design package) by

Don Jung. His instructions to them were to cut corners whenever doing so might

result in time savings. They were also to suggest to members of the functional

departments that were working on this project methods that could possibly result

in quicker turnaround of the work required of them. The project team coerced the

various engineering departments into operating outside of their normal proce-

dures due to the special circumstances surrounding this job. For example, the civil

engineering section prepared a special preliminary structural steel package, and

the piping engineering section prepared preliminary piping packages so that the

purchasing department could go out on inquiry immediately. Normally, the pur-

chasing department would have to wait for formal take-offs from both of these

departments before they could send out inquiries to potential vendors. Operating in

680 THE LYLE CONSTRUCTION PROJECT

VP of Procurement

J. Mabby

Project (Lyle)

R. Stewart

Project

Administrative

Asst.

Mgr. of Projects Mgr. of Buying,

Expediting, Traffic Chief Inspector

Buyers

Inspectors

Project

Chie f

Expeditor and

Expeditors

Traffic

Personnel

Exhibit III. Atlay Company procurement department organizational chart

c17.qxd 12/21/12 7:00

Our website has a team of professional writers who can help you write any of your homework. They will write your papers from scratch. We also have a team of editors just to make sure all papers are of HIGH QUALITY & PLAGIARISM FREE. To make an Order you only need to click Ask A Question and we will direct you to our Order Page at WriteDemy. Then fill Our Order Form with all your assignment instructions. Select your deadline and pay for your paper. You will get it few hours before your set deadline.

Fill in all the assignment paper details that are required in the order form with the standard information being the page count, deadline, academic level and type of paper. It is advisable to have this information at hand so that you can quickly fill in the necessary information needed in the form for the essay writer to be immediately assigned to your writing project. Make payment for the custom essay order to enable us to assign a suitable writer to your order. Payments are made through Paypal on a secured billing page. Finally, sit back and relax.

Do you need an answer to this or any other questions?