BIS2003 IS Project Management | My Assignment Tutor

Assessment Brief: BIS2003 IS Project ManagementTrimester 1, 2021Assessment Overview Assessment TaskTypeWeightingDueLengthULOAssessment 1: Quiz30 minutes test comprising ofmultiple-choice questionsIndividual40%Weeks 1-1030 minsULO-1ULO-2ULO-3ULO-4ULO-5Assessment 2: Case Study withpresentationUndertake an analysis of the case,discuss reasons for failure andpropose a solution how projectmanagement techniques can solveproblems.Group30%Week 63000wordsULO-1ULO-2ULO-3ULO-4Assessment 3: Applied ProjectApply and integrate projectmanagement concepts and tools toa specific IS development project.Individual30%Week 123500wordsULO-2ULO-3ULO-4ULO-5 Assessment 1: Quiz Due date:Weeks 1-10Group/individual:IndividualWord count / Time provided:30 minutesWeighting:40%Unit Learning Outcomes:ULO-1, ULO-2, ULO-3, ULO-4, ULO-5 Assessment Details:The weekly quizzes will assess your knowledge and understanding of key concepts in the ProjectManagement Knowledge Areas. For successful completion of the quiz, you are required to study thematerial provided (lecture slides, tutorials, and reading materials), engage in the unit’s activities, andin the discussion forums. The prescribed textbook is the main reference along with the recommendedreading material. By completing this assessment successfully, you will be able to identify key aspectsof the best project management practices. This will then help in achieving ULO1, this in turn will helpyou in achieving CLO-1, which collectively with other unit learning outcomes will help in achievingGA2.Marking Information: The quiz will be marked out of 100 and will be weighed 40% of the total unitmark.Assessment 2: Case Study and Presentation Due date:Week 6Group/individual:GroupWord count / Time provided:3000 wordsWeighting:30%Unit Learning Outcomes:ULO-1, ULO-2, ULO-3, ULO-4 SystemTech Case StudyBackgroundSystemTech is an Australia-based travel agency that specializes in the rental of high-quality selfcatering accommodation in Australia. For the summer months, it offers a wide selection of gîtes(holiday cottages) and, for the winter, apartments and chalets in various ski resorts. The company wasfounded by three friends who still own it, Emeka Steven, Daniel Okw and Ric Nelson, and the companyhas been in business since 2000. It has grown rapidly to achieve a turnover of some AU$25.75 millionper annum and employs more than 170 staff at three offices, one in the Greater Sydney area, one inMelbourne and one in Melbourne. SystemTech has a website, but it is not functionally effective.SystemTech currently uses three main sales channels:• Direct selling to customers through mailshots of its brochures and customer support centres(60 per cent of sales).• Sales via high street travel agents (22 per cent of sales).• Sales via phone calls (18 per cent of sales)However, the company is aware from press coverage and from surveys on its own customers thatthere is a growing public demand to be able to book holidays via the internet. This is particularly trueas its customers are precisely the sort of people who are ‘net aware’. SystemTech does have awebsite, but this is just its latest brochure in electronic format, and it does not have links to up-todate availability data or the facilities for customers to make secure bookings online. Consequently,SystemTech has decided to implement a new internet-based booking system. This will be linked to itsexisting computerized booking system, which contains data on the availability of properties, and to itscustomer database as well as having secure links over which credit card data can be received. Inaddition, the company wants its management information system (MIS) enhanced so that it can trawlits databases and send targeted information to customers on properties that are likely to be of interestto them.SystemTech organizationThe current organizational structure of the company is shown in Figure 1.1. The three founders havedivided the business among themselves. Emeka Steven (who has a sales background) looks after thesales and operations side, Daniel Okw, an accountant, takes care of finance and administration andRic Nelson who is a lawyer and experience in IT takes care of the IT and company’s legal matters. Thesmall IT department within the administration function consists of the IT manager, Peter Clay, threeanalyst/programmers and a computer operator/trainee programmer.Figure 1.1 Organization of SystemTechThe projectBecause of the small size of its IT department, and since the department lacks skills in the design of ecommerce applications, SystemTech has decided to entrust the development of its internet service toa consultancy company, Eagles iTechnology. This firm has tendered for the following services:• Analysis of the requirements.• Production of a detailed requirements specification.• Design, development and implementation of the internet systems, including a new websiteand secure communications links.• Training SystemTech staff in the use of the new systems.• Specification of the interfaces required from SystemTech’s existing customer database andbooking system (the development of the links at the SystemTech end to be done by its own ITdepartment).• Specification of the additional hardware required to support the new system (to be obtainedfrom SystemTech’s usual suppliers, the procurement to be managed by the IT department).• ‘Skills transfer’ to SystemTech’s IT department, so that ongoing maintenance anddevelopment of the new system can be handled in-house. The development of the MISaspects of the new system will be dealt with by SystemTech’s IT department.The date now is 1 November 2020 and SystemTech wants to have the new system up and running forthe start of the winter season’s bookings at the end of June 2021.The internet booking project is a result of a recent strategic review of SystemTech undertaken by itssenior managers – the three directors and their direct reports.The SWOT analysis showed that SystemTech has a good reputation in its marketplace and a lot of‘brand recognition’ by its target market. However, this target market (reasonably affluentprofessionals) does make extensive use of the internet and it was felt that being unable to offer thisservice would increasingly become a weakness. At least one of SystemTech’s competitors already hasan internet booking service (albeit not a very good one) and others are sure to follow soon. Applyingthe internet to SystemTech’s position using Porter’s five forces model also produced some interestingresults. The internet tends to increase the power of buyers (as they can shop around more easily) andlowers the cost of entry for new competitors. In addition, the suppliers (the owners of the gîtes andchalets) can also set up their own websites, thereby cutting out brokers like SystemTech and increasingtheir own relative power. The conclusion of the strategy review was, therefore, that not setting up aninternet service was not a viable option. Also, since the competitors’ sites were not very good atpresent, it was felt that creating a very good and user-friendly site would provide a source ofcompetitive advantage (at least in the short to medium term).The SWOT analysis conducted by SystemTech has already shown that not having an internet service isnot a viable scenario, since so many of the company’s customers now regularly use the internet.However, the issue still arises as to how much it would be worth investing in the project, and thismeans that the company has had to develop a business case for undertaking the internetdevelopment. Ric Nelson, as the accountant, has undertaken production of the business case and hehas identified three main business options that could be considered:1. Building an internet booking system for SystemTech and interfacing that with the company’sexisting systems.2. Building a standalone internet system and operating the internet booking as, in effect, aseparate subsidiary business.3. Finding a partner organization with an internet booking system and interfacing SystemTech’ssystem with that.The third option is unattractive as the customers of the booking system would not be SystemTech’sown and this is considered very important. Daniel also rejected the second option as it is likely thatthe company’s customers would sometimes use the internet and sometimes book over the telephoneand having two sales channels would go against the principle of being a ‘one-stop shop’ for all thecustomers’ requirements.Consequently, the business case has been built around the first option, adding a web-based bookingfront-end to the existing booking system.Daniel has used SystemTech’s salesforce to conduct a telephone survey of existing customers, andthat has suggested that an additional AU$80,000 of business might be secured each year via theinternet. Assessing the likely amount of additional business (from new customers) is more difficult buta recent travel industry survey concluded that firms could attract 10–15 per cent new customersthrough e-commerce. If true, this would mean that SystemTech could obtain between AU$78,000 andAU$120,000 per annum more business through web bookings, but the directors, wishing to becautious, have opted for the lower figure. In total, then, it seems as if the internet booking systemshould secure an additional AU$178,000 worth of business annually. The directors want to break evenon their investment in three years and so this suggests a maximum cost for the internet developmentof AU$384,000. Initial discussions with various potential software vendors, including their preferredpartner Eagles iTechnology, suggest that a system could be developed for AU$376,000. On that basis,the directors approve the business case.Eagles iTechnology, the consultancy firm engaged by SystemTech to develop its internet-basedsystem, has recommended the use of a PRINCE2®-type structure to manage the project.The project board will be made up of:• Emeka Steven, one of SystemTech’s directors, as executive• James Vic SystemTech’s customer services manager, as senior user• Grace Moore, Eagles iTechnology’s account manager, as senior supplier.The project board will meet on a Thursday afternoon every two weeks during the project.There was some argument about how the role of project manager should be filled. Simon Nick,SystemTech’s IT manager, thought that he should take this position, with the Eagles iTechnologyproject manager being a team manager. However, Eagles iTechnology argued that, as it was doingmost of the development work, it would make more sense for Eagles iTechnology to provide theproject manager. In the end, Emeka Steven agreed with Eagles iTechnology and so the projectmanager will be Paul Johnson, an Eagles iTechnology principal consultant. He will manage two teams,one led by Simon Nick which will develop the MIS aspects of the new system and the other led byEagles iTechnology’s Tim Cook which will develop the internet software.Eagles iTechnology will also provide the project support functions, as it has a project support officethat works with all its projects.The project assurance functions will be discharged by a small team comprising:• James Vic, one of Jean Hunt’s sales supervisors• Tim Jones, one of the IT managers• Rage Munde, SystemTech’ management accountant• Jack Lukas, Eagles iTechnology’s quality assurance manager.Assessment Details:As a project management student at APIC, you are required to perform tasks and answer the followingquestions:1. Draw the SystemTech’s IT project organizational chart that will be implementing the project?2. What is the IT Project Management structure (functional, project and matrix)? Explain.3. What is the Project Proposal Life Cycle? Who is involved and how in the Cycle?4. Who are the stakeholders involved in the Information System Development project?5. How you would you describe the Initiating and Planning Information System ProjectManagement Process Groups in relation to the Project Management Knowledge Areas?6. Provide a SWOT analysis of the Information System Development project.Two documents should be submitted:1. MS Word document. You must follow the Harvard style sources references.2. MS Power Point presentation (up to 20 slides), One submission for each groupIn your work on the assignment you need to use the following sources:• SBM4305 Lecture Notes• The prescribed textbook (Schwalbe 2018)Please remember that this is a practical assessment and you are NOT required to write any generalinformation, definitions and references to another books and articles. These items will not bemarked.Marking Criteria and Rubric: The assessment will be marked out of 100 and will be weighted 30%of the total unit mark Marking CriteriaNotsatisfactory(0-49%) of thecriterionmark)Satisfactory(50-64%) of thecriterion markGood(65-74%) of thecriterion markVery Good(75-84%) of thecriterion markExcellent(85-100%) of thecriterion markAnalysis of the FV(SystemTech) profileand businessprocesses (5%)Inadequateanalysis of theFV profile andbusinessprocessesBasic understandingof FV profile andbusiness processesExhibits breadthand depth ofunderstanding ofFV profile andbusiness processesExhibits accurateand detailedbreadth and depthof understanding ofthe FV profile andbusiness processesDisplays exceptionalunderstanding of theFV profile andbusiness processesAnalysis of FV Projectmanagement structure(10%)Inadequateunderstanding ofFV ProjectmanagementstructureBasic understandingonly of FV ProjectmanagementstructureExhibits breadthand depth ofunderstanding of FVProjectmanagementstructureExhibits accurateand detailedbreadth and depthof understanding ofFV ProjectmanagementstructureDisplays exceptionalunderstanding of FVProject managementstructureDemonstrateunderstanding ofWhat is the ProjectInadequateunderstanding ofProject ProposalBasic understandingof Project ProposalLife Cycle andExhibits breadthand depth ofunderstanding ofExhibits accurateand detailedbreadth and depthDisplays exceptionalunderstanding ofProject Proposal Life Proposal Life Cycle?Who is involved andhow in the Cycle andstakeholderrequirements (20%)Life Cycle andStakeholderAnalysisStakeholderAnalysisProject ProposalLife Cycle andStakeholderAnalysisof understanding ofProject ProposalLife Cycle andStakeholderAnalysisCycle andStakeholder AnalysisDemonstrateunderstanding ofmapping of FV PMProcess Groups on toProject ManagementKnowledgeAreas(30%)Inadequateunderstanding ofmapping of PMProcess Groupson to ProjectManagementKnowledgeAreasBasic understandingof mapping of PMProcess Groups onto ProjectManagementKnowledge AreasExhibits breadthand depth ofunderstanding ofmapping of PMProcess Groups onto ProjectManagementKnowledge AreasExhibits accurateand detailedbreadth and depthof understanding ofmapping of PMProcess Groups onto ProjectManagementKnowledge AreasDisplays exceptionalunderstanding ofmapping of PMProcess Groups on toProject ManagementKnowledge AreasDemonstrateunderstanding ofSWOT analysis andreasons of the projectfailure. (15%)Inadequateunderstanding ofSWOT analysisand reasons ofthe projectfailure.Inadequateunderstanding ofSWOT analysis andreasons of theproject failure.Exhibits breadthand depth ofunderstanding ofSWOT analysis andreasons of theproject failure.Exhibits accurateand detailedunderstanding ofSWOT analysis andreasons of theproject failure.Displays exceptionalunderstanding ofSWOT analysis andreasons of theproject failure.Presentation Content.Understanding of theselected project caseand of the projectscope components(10%)Lack of evidenceof adequateunderstanding ofthe selectedproject case.Majority ofinformationirrelevant andsignificant pointsleft outEvidence of basicknowledge andskills of developingproject scopestatement.Has given a factualand/or conceptualknowledge andskillsbase in developingproject scopestatementand give a briefaboutthe projectbackgroundReasonableknowledgeand skills ofdevelopingproject scopestatement.Has excellent skills indeveloping projectscope statement.The presentationwas aconcise summary oftheselected project. Allquestions answered.Comprehensive andcomplete coverageofinformationPresentation visualappeal.Presentation slides,clarity, grammar,spelling and engaging(10%)Lack of evidenceof writtenpresentationskills(no visualappeal).The slides weredifficult to readand too muchinformation hadbeen copiedontothem.There are manyerrors inspelling,grammar andpunctuationEvidence of basicskills ofcommunicating(writing) in projectenvironment.Minimal effortmade to makeslidesappealingHas given a factualand/or conceptualskillbase incommunication(writing) in projectenvironment.There are someerrorsin spelling, grammarand punctuation. Insome slides, toomuchinformation on twoormore slides.good visual appeal.Has very good skillsincommunicating(writing) a projectreportThere are fewerrors inspelling, grammarandpunctuation. veryvisualappeal.Has excellent skills incommunicating(writing) in projectenvironmentThere are no errorsinspelling, grammarandpunctuation.Information is clearandconcise on eachslide.Excellent visuallyappealthat is engaging. Assessment 3: Applied Project Due date:Week 12Group/individual:IndividualWord count / Time provided:3500 wordsWeighting:30%Unit Learning Outcomes:ULO-2, ULO-3, ULO-4, ULO-5 In this assignment, you will continue working on the SystemTech project.The Applied Project assignment includes the following tasks:1. Based on case study provided, explain phases of the Project Life Cycle (PLC)2. Create a Stakeholder Register (SR) and Communication Management Plan (CMP)3. Create a Project Charter (PC) that would approved/signed4. Create a Project Network Diagram (PND)5. Calculate the project cost and the Net Present Value (NPV) – download the project costs andexamples from Canvas6. Create the Project Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)The submission should include 2 files:• MS Word file that includes items 1 – 4, 6• MS Excel file with the calculations of the project cost and NPVPlease remember that this is a practical assessment and you are NOT required to insert anygeneral information, definitions and references to books and articles. These items will not bemarked.Marking Criteria and Rubric: The assessment will be marked out of 100 and will be weighted 30%of the total unit mark. Marking CriteriaNotsatisfactory(0-49%) of thecriterionmark)Satisfactory(50-64%) of thecriterion markGood(65-74%) of thecriterion markVery Good(75-84%) of thecriterion markExcellent(85-100%) of thecriterion markDemonstrate anunderstanding ofproject life cycle (10%)Inadequateunderstanding ofthe life cycleBasic knowledgeonly of theunderstanding ofproject life cycleExhibits breadthand depth ofunderstanding ofthe project life cycleExhibits accurateand detailedbreadth and depthof understanding ofproject life cycleDisplays exceptionalunderstanding ofproject life cycleProduce a Costanalysis document andNPV using Excelspreadsheet (30%)Inadequateunderstanding ofcost calculationand NPV; cannotuse Excel forproducing NPVBasic understandingof cost calculation,NPV and ExcelfeaturesExhibits breadthand depth ofunderstanding ofcost calculations,NPV and ExcelfeaturesExhibits accurateand detailedbreadth and depthof understanding ofcost calculations,NPV and ExcelfeaturesDisplays exceptionalunderstanding ofcost calculations,NPV and its practicalapplication.Producesexceptionalknowledge of Excelfeatures to calculateNPV.Demonstrateunderstanding ofcommunicationmanagement andability to create PC, PSand CMP (40%)Inadequateunderstanding ofappropriatetechniques andtools for creatingProject Charter,ProjectStakeholder andCommunicationAnalysisBasic knowledgeonly of appropriatetechniques andtools for creatingProject Charter,Project Stakeholderand CommunicationAnalysisExhibits breadthand depth ofunderstanding ofappropriatetechniques andtools for creatingProject Charter,Project Stakeholderand CommunicationAnalysisExhibits accurateand detailedbreadth and depthof understanding ofappropriatetechniques andtools for creatingProject Charter,Project Stakeholderand CommunicationAnalysisDisplays exceptionalunderstanding ofconcepts and theirpractical applicationof appropriatetechniques and toolsfor creating ProjectCharter, ProjectStakeholder andCommunicationAnalysisProduce a PND andWBS (20%)Inadequateunderstanding ofPND diagramcannot discussconcepts in ownwordsBasic knowledgeonly of PNDdiagram; limiteddepth of basicconceptsExhibits breadthand depth ofunderstanding ofMND diagramExhibits accurateand detailedbreadth and depthof MND diagramDisplays exceptionalunderstanding ofconcepts and theirpractical applicationof PND diagram

QUALITY: 100% ORIGINAL PAPER – NO PLAGIARISM – CUSTOM PAPER

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *