Refer to the Assignment Guidelines for assistance in completing this assignment. Remember to integrate academic theory into your assignment to support your arguments and proposals.
Provide the following:
Assignment 2 mark sheet: Download the MGT8022 electronic submission mark sheet from the StudyDesk. Electronic assignments should follow the correct file-naming guidelines.
Title page: Ensure that your document includes a normal report cover sheet or title page that would be expected of a professional document to provide details of report title, author, date, student number, etc. (this is in addition to the electronic mark sheet discussed above). This assignment is a professional academic paper so should be presented as one.
PART 1: CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF THE PROJECT MANAGEMENT PLAN
Executive Summary (200–250 words but this does not form part of the assignment word count). The executive summary comes before the table of contents. Read the guidelines and provide a formal Executive Summary with details of why the report was prepared, how it is structured, and what the important findings, conclusions and recommendations are. The Executive Summary relates to the analysis only. (SUGGESTION: this should be written last after you have finished the report.)
Table of contents: This should be a full listing with respective page numbers of executive summary, introduction, main sections, references, individual appendices, and full listing of all figures and tables.
1. Introduction (250 words): Briefly state why your report has been prepared, what project is being analysed, and how the report is structured. (Note – this may be similar to the introduction in assignment 1 if you have used the same project, but this is a new report, and you need to provide the information your reader needs to understand the report. You can use the same information in both assignments. There is no need to reference assignment 1 if you are using your original work.)
2. Project background (250 words): Your project description should describe the project and its context – what organisation is the project owner/sponsor, what this organisation does, why the project is being done, where it is located, etc. The description should contain enough detail for the reader to understand the reason behind each of the components of the plan – why it is included and its content and format.
3. Audience and structure of the Project Management Plan (1000–1500 words approximately)
3.1 Provide a critical analysis of who is intended to be the main audience of the PM plan? What do they need to know? How will they use the plan? What information needs to be provided?
3.2 What alternatives exist for the structure of a PM plan (examine and compare a range of theories and opinions here)? How should that information be provided? In what sequence? What does the theory say?
4. Contents of the Project Management Plan (1000–1500 words approximately)
Provide a critical analysis of the major sections of the plan and provide some theoretical framework for what is included in each section (e.g. Why has a project schedule been included, is it a meaningful document, was it prepared by the right people, does it contain the right information, etc.?) This explanation will be drawn from the study modules, text book, selected readings, and other sources. This discussion will probably cover most, if not all, knowledge areas covered under the Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide) (PMI 2013) in one form or another. It does not have to be under those headings but should clearly indicate that it covers all recognised areas covered by the various Project Management Bodies of Knowledge.
5. Conclusions (250 words): Summarise your findings from the analysis of your project management plan. What did you find out about the project plan? Does it conform to the recognised theory? What aspects are important and are of significance to project outcomes? What are its strengths and its weaknesses? (Focus here on the project plan and not on the theory).
6. Recommendations (250 words): What are your recommendations flowing from this analysis with regard to your chosen PMP? What changes should be made to your PMP for this project (or similar future projects)? Address the shortcomings identified in the conclusions. Again, focus on recommendations related to your PMP and not on the project itself.