Network Project Management

		Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines
Unit Code	MN601
Unit Title	Network Project Management
Assessment	Individual case study assignment
Title
Purpose of the	The purpose of this assignment is to build a clear understanding of project
assessment	management fundamentals and their application, specifically:
(with ULO		demonstrate project leadership skills; identify and assess risk in
Mapping)		designing, executing a major project;
		critically reflect on current project management ethics, research, and
		theory and practice;
Submission	A draft of the report must be submitted on Moodle by the day before the
Guidelines	Week‐6 class, to get feedback from the tutor in Week‐6. Updated version of
	the report must be submitted on Moodle the day before your Week‐7 class.
	The assignment must be in MS Word format, 1.5 spacing, 11‐pt Calibri
		(Body) font and 2 cm margins on all four sides of your page with appropriate
		section headings.
	Reference sources must be cited in the text of the report, and listed
	appropriately at the end in a reference list using IEEE referencing style.
Extension	If an extension of time to submit work is required, a Special Consideration
		Application must be submitted directly on AMS. You must submit this
		application three working days prior to the due date of the assignment.
		Further information is available at:
		http://www.mit.edu.au/about‐mit/institute‐publications/policies‐
		procedures‐and‐guidelines/specialconsiderationdeferment
Academic	Academic Misconduct is a serious offence. Depending on the seriousness of
Misconduct		the case, penalties can vary from a written warning or zero marks to
		exclusion from the course or rescinding the degree. Students should make
		themselves familiar with the full policy and procedure available at:
		http://www.mit.edu.au/about‐mit/institute‐publications/policies‐
		procedures‐and‐guidelines/Plagiarism‐Academic‐Misconduct‐Policy‐
		Procedure. For further information, please refer to the Academic Integrity
		Section in your Unit Description.

Purpose of the assessment:

In this assessment task, you are required examine a project case and write a 800‐1000 words (excluding references) report on the project management and ethical issues.

Case description:

1.    Assistant Project Manager Jim Rains was 26 years old, when he newly hired at a large commercial construction company, and assigned to work on a $34 million dollar university classroom project in the southeast United States. Upon arriving on the job site, Jim was introduced to the head superintendent Bob Moore who had been with the firm for 25 years. Bob was an exceptionally proficient organizer and was often requested by clients for the supervision of their construction projects. As the project began, things on a whole went smoothly. In fact, Jim was learning and taking on more project management responsibilities every day.

2.    The winter and spring months brought many days of rain. Often, Bob would have to send several carpenters home because there was nothing at the construction site for them to do when it was raining. This did not sit well with the carpenters when they could only work 3 days per week (and were paid for 3 days work) because of rainouts. Other times, Bob would not send the carpenters home, but would have them sweep up the floors that were already under roof. This activity would normally take 2 hours with a crew of 4, but Bob would be forced to pay them for a full 8‐hour day. Some days Bob, being one to hate inefficiency (and the potential loss of workers not returning to the site after being sent home), sent some of the carpenters (who would normally be just standing around and sweeping on rainy days) to his home to work. There the carpenters would work on interior framing, finish carpentry, and hang drywall in Bob's new addition. Bob figured that as long as the carpenters were just hanging around the site with little to do, they might as well earn their pay.

3.    The third time Bob sent carpenters to his house on a rainy day; Jim decided to talk with Bob about the issue of billing the carpenter's hours to the job site construction cost. Bob was very noncommittal about the whole issue leaving Jim with the dilemma of confronting one of the company's best superintendents. After three more days of watching, several carpenters go to Bob's house to work, Jim could no longer tolerate the practice and told Bob that it was unethical to use company employees for personal work. Bob told Jim that if he did not send the carpenters home on rainy days they would get paid for basically doing nothing. By sending the carpenters to his house to use their skills, he was keeping his workers motivated and satisfied instead of laying them off or having them do small, time‐filling jobs.

4.  Getting nowhere with the superintendent, Jim had some major decisions to make. Should he go to the project manager or someone in the home office? What would the company think about some new employee questioning the practices of a long‐term employee?

5.   Because Jim was new to the organization, he decided to talk with Bob one more time and asked that he discontinue billing employee hours to the construction project if they were in fact working on Bob's own house. Bob again refrained from doing anything, only commenting that the workers would soon be able to work a normal 5‐day workweek because the rainy season was about to end. Jim still could not let the issue go.

Assignment task

Write a report on the above case study that addresses the following issues; and carry out research on project management practice and discuss the ethical implications in this case. In your report, you must use the headings given in Table 1. We encourage you to use at least 10 key peer reviewed sources for your analysis (a combination of journals, conference papers, website or any other reliable source to support your analysis).

Table 1: Report headings, their description, and marks for each
		Heading	Description		Marks
	1.	PM Leadership	Discuss, how well are leadership skills demonstrated? Justify		5
			your answer in relation to the incidents in the cases study.
	2.	PM Execution	Elaborate on how well is the execution of the project going.		5
			What could be the alternatives to the current processes
			being followed?
	3.	PM Risk Analysis	Which risk(s) should the project plan have identified, and		5
			what could be their risk mitigation plan(s)?
	4.	Ethics Assessment	Document facts about the ethical dilemma(s) arising in this		5
			case, and explore questions such as:
			•Does it abide by the law?
			•Does it align with the PMI Code of Ethics and
			Professional Conduct?
	5.	Ethics Alternatives	Consider the choices available to the concerned parties by		5
			documenting the following questions:
			What are the possible alternative choices?
			What are the pros and cons for each possible choice?
	6.	Ethics Analysis	Identify the candidate decision and test its validity using the		5
			factors suggested by PMI Ethical Decision‐Making
			Framework.
	7.	Ethics Application	Apply ethical principles to your candidate decision by asking		5
			questions such as:
			Would the choice result in the greatest good?
			Would the choice be fair and beneficial to all
			concerned?
	8.	Ethics Action	Make a decision after considering relevant questions, and		5
			justify your choice.
	9.	References	List references and give in‐text referencing using IEEE style.		5
			TOTAL		45

Marking Rubric:

Grade →	HD	DI	CR	P	Fail
Mark →	80‐100%	70‐79%	60‐69%	50‐59%	<50%
For ↓	Excellent	Very	Good	Satisfactory	Unsatisfactory
		Good
All	All points	Points	Points	Points	Points
questions	discussed are	presented	presented	presented	presented are
	pertinent and	are	are generally	are	not relevant to
	covered in depth.	relevant	relevant and	somewhat	the assignment
	Demonstrated the	and	analysed.	relevance	topic.
	ability to think	soundly		and briefly
	critically and	analysed.		discussed.
	make good use of
	the source
	material.

 To get solution visit our website www.sourceessay.com