Task 2 – Critical Review of Project Management Practices Critically review whether the project management tools, techniques, and processes discussed in the module have been effectively applied in the CHIE project. Select three of the

Assessment Details

Module Title:	Project Management in Business
Module Code:	QH0531
Module Leader:	Ilham Archer
Level:	5
Assessment Title:	Individual Report
Assessment Number:	AE1
Assessment Type:	Report
Restrictions on Time/Word Count:	2500 words (excluding appendices)
Consequence of not meeting time/word count limit:	There is no penalty for submitting below the word/count limit, but you should be aware that there is a risk you may not maximise your potential mark. It is essential that assignments keep within the time/word count limit stated above. Any work beyond the maximum time/word length permitted will be disregarded and not accounted for in the final grade.
Individual/Group:	Individual
If a group	N/A
Assessment Weighting:	100%
Issue Date:	Monday 30th September 2024
Hand In Date:	27 th January 2025 by 4pm
Planned Feedback Date:	20 working days following submission
Mode of Submission:	On-line Only FINAL submissions will be accepted. DRAFT submissions will not be considered an attempt and will not be marked.
Anonymous Marking	This assessment: (a) Will be marked anonymously.

Assessment Task

Using your knowledge and skills developed throughout the module, you are required to critically review the CHIE (Care and Health Information Exchange) Project carried out by the National Health Service (NHS) and produce a reflective project management case study report. This assessment will be evaluated against the CMI Learning Objectives and will be completed in three tasks outlined below.

Task 1 – Evaluation of Project Management Tools and Processes

You should consider the project management tools, techniques, and processes discussed during the module and outline your understanding and evaluation of,

• The role of projects in delivering organizational strategy.
• The process for initiating, planning, and managing projects.

Task 2 – Critical Review of Project Management Practices

Critically review whether the project management tools, techniques, and processes discussed in the module have been effectively applied in the CHIE project. Select three of the following topics to analyse.

• Project context
• Stakeholder management
• Governance & Monitoring progress
• Outputs, outcomes, and benefits; reporting and achievement
• Data and information
• Problem-solving and decision-making
• Risk management

Task 3 – Reflection and Recommendations

With reference to the CHIE project, outline which factors contributed to effective project management and which areas could be improved. You should also make recommendations for how similar projects could be managed more effectively in the future.

Additional Information

Students must investigate and research additional information about the CHIE project, alongside the content covered in lectures and seminars sessions, to undertake a comprehensive and critical review. Ensure you apply relevant concepts, theories, tools, techniques, and processes, supported by a wide range of credible academic sources.

Formative assessment opportunities will be provided during seminars through case study exercises, presentations, draft submissions, and other activities.

This assessment must be your own work. Submitting identical or very similar work to other students will be subject to academic misconduct guidelines and procedures. Furthermore, ensure that your work adheres to academic integrity standards . You are required to submit evidence of completing the Academic Integrity Course in the appendices. Any detected misuse of generative AI tools, plagiarism, or poor academic practice will be penalised in accordance with the universitys academic misconduct policy.

There is only one assessment for this module, which must be passed to proceed to Level 6 or gain your Honours degree. Be sure to engage with all formative and summative checkpoints and ask questions during the module!

Assessment Guidance

Structuring Your Report

Your report should demonstrate both critical thinking and practical application of project management concepts. The following sections are recommended. However, you have the freedom to come up with your own structure.

• Cover Page
• Executive Summary (Not included in the word count)
• A concise overview of the reports key points and findings.
• Table of Contents (Not included in the word count)
• List of Figures (Not included in the word count)
• List of Tables (Not included in the word count)
  • Background of the Report: Outline the purpose of the report and its relevance.
  • Introduction to NHS and the CHIE Project: Provide an overview of the NHS and the specifics of the CHIE project.
  • Demonstrate your understanding of strategic alignment in project management.
  • Discuss the project life cycle and your theoretical understanding of project initiation, planning, and management.
  • Introduce Three Evaluation Criteria – Choose three topics (e.g., project context, stakeholder management, risk management, etc.) and explain why they are important.
  • Evaluate the CHIE Project – Critically analyse the CHIE project using the selected criteria, applying relevant theories and concepts discussed in the module.
  • Discuss the factors that contributed to the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of the CHIE project.
  • Provide actionable recommendations that align with your evaluation in Task 2, suggesting improvements for managing similar projects in the future.
  • Summarise the key insights from your report, linking back to the learning outcomes and critical analysis.

Conclusion

Task 3 – Reflection and Recommendations

Task 2 – Critical Review of Project Management Practices

Task 1 – Evaluation of Project Management Tools and Processes

Introduction

Recommendations

• Provide suggestions for improvement relating to your project and the sector (if appropriate)
• References (Not included in the word count)
  • Cite all academic sources and references according to the required referencing style.
• Appendices (Not included in the word count)
  • Include supporting documents, such as evidence of completing the Academic Integrity Course, if required.

Research Requirements

You are required to incorporate at least 10 academic sources (e.g., books, journal articles, and research papers). In addition, a minimum of 3 credible external sources (e.g., industry reports and government publications) could be used to support your industry-specific analysis. Be selective with your sources, ensuring they are both current and credible. Refrain from using generic web content and ensure that industry data is properly cited.

Limiting AI Tool Use

While AI tools can assist in preliminary research or grammar checks, the creation of content or arguments must be your own work. Evidence of excessive reliance on AI-generated content (including paraphrasing tools) will be considered a breach of academic integrity and will lead to penalties.

Formatting and Referencing

All sources must be referenced using the Solent Harvard Referencing style . This includes accurate in-text citations, and a complete reference list organised alphabetically by the author’s surname. Ensure that your work is formatted professionally, with proper headings and a logical flow.

Academic Support and Resources

• Formative Feedback: Use the feedback provided during the lectures and Seminars sessions to refine your arguments and ensure a cohesive structure.
• Library Resources: Access the universitys online library for peer-reviewed journals, books, and industry reports.
• Workshops: Attend workshops on academic writing and referencing to improve the quality of your work further.

Note – You must ensure that your submission adheres to the universitys academic integrity policy. Detected breaches, including overreliance on AI tools, will result in formal academic penalties.

Assessment criteria

Criteria

F3

F2

F1

D3

D2

D1

C3

C2

C1

B3

B2

B1

A4

A3

A2

A1

Solent Grade

15

20

35

42

45

48

52

55

58

62

65

68

74

83

92

100

Introduction and Background Information. Introduction and background to project and sector. Report aims and objectives. Understand and analyse the role of project management in delivering organisational strategy.

Inappropriate background to the project, with limited to no report aims & objectives presented. This section does not set the scene for the purpose of the report.

Very limited background information to the project with limited or inappropriate report aims and objectives. Very limited scene setting.

Adequate background to the project, with limited clarity to report aims & objectives presented. This section only somewhat sets the scene for the purpose of the report.

Relatively clear background project with report aims & objectives appropriately presented. This section attempts to set the scene for the purpose of the report.

Clear background to the project, with good presentation of report aims & objectives. This section clearly sets the scene for the purpose of the report.

Excellent background to the project with report aims & objectives clearly presented. This section very clearly sets the scene for the purpose of the report.

Exceptionally clear background of the project provided, with report aims & objectives clearly presented. This section very clearly sets the scene for the purpose of the report.

Critical review, discussion, and reflections Consideration and justification of a range of relevant issues regarding project management. To include a range of issues, including, but not limited to those detailed in the Assessment Brief Understand and evaluate processes for initiating, planning, and managing projects, including ethical. legal and organisational factors

Virtually none, if any, identification of very few relevant issues No critical review and reflection. None, if any, application of key theoretical concepts to issues & implications identified.

Minimal, if any, identification of very few relevant issues Extremely limited critical review and reflection. Very little application of key theoretical concepts to issues & implications identified.

Limited identification of a small range of relevant issues. Vague critical review and reflection. Somewhat limited application of key theoretical concepts to issues & implications identified.

Acceptable identification of an adequate range of relevant issues. Some critical review and reflection. Generally appropriate evidence of application of key theoretical concepts to issues & implications identified.

Good identification of a wide range of relevant issues. Good critical review and reflection. Strong application of key theoretical concepts to issues & implications identified.

Excellent identification of a very wide range of relevant issues. Excellent critical review and reflection. Excellent application of key theoretical concepts to issues & implications identified.

Exceptional identification of an outstandingly wide range of relevant issues. Exceptionally strong critical review and reflection. Outstanding application of key theoretical concepts to issues & implications identified.

Recommendations and Conclusion Appropriate recommendations; with reference APM BOK7 Relevant and appropriate conclusion Analyse the factors that contribute to effective project management and identify best practices.

No recommendations made.

Unacceptable level/range of recommendations made.

Limited conclusions. Recommendations with limited relevance.

Appropriate conclusions. Range of recommendations that are generally relevant, but not necessarily to the wider sector.

Good conclusions with range of recommendations that are relevant to the project and the sector that they are operating in.

Excellent conclusions with range of recommendations that are relevant & appropriate to the project itself, the sector in which they operate, as well as other sectors.

Exceptional conclusions with range of recommendations that are clearly relevant & appropriate to the project and the sector in which they operate, as well as other sectors.

Clarity Structure and organisation of material. Spelling, grammar, and professionalism of report appearance.

Very poor structure and organisation of material. Report not presented with a professional appearance.

Unacceptable presentation of key information. Report not well presented with material unorganised and not suitable.

Adequate presentation of key information, although overall arguments somewhat confusing to follow. Evidence somewhat structured, although not necessarily in a coherent or logical manner.

Acceptable presentation of key information. Material generally organised, with overall line of argument somewhat logical. Information within report presented acceptably, although not all of it in a professional manner.

Good presentation of key information. Material well organised, with overall arguments and line of reasoning easy to follow. Report generally presented in a professional manner.

Excellent presentation of key information. Material very well organised, with overall arguments and line of reasoning easy to follow. Report presented in a professional manner

Exceptional presentation of key information. Material very clearly organised, with overall arguments and line of reasoning extremely easy to follow. Report presented in a very professional manner.

References Harvard method used. Range of references within text. References/Bibliography at the end of the text.

References not provided (within the text and at the end of the text.

Extremely limited references provided (in-text and at the end of the text) and poor compliance with Harvard method of referencing.

Some references provided (within the text and at the end of the text) with some to many errors with the Harvard method of referencing.

An acceptable level of references provided (within the text and at the end of the text). Some errors made with the Harvard method of referencing.

A good range of references provided (within the text and at the end of the text). References generally in accordance with the Harvard method of referencing.

Excellent range of references provided (within the text and at the end of the text). Very few referencing errors in accordance with the Harvard method of referencing.

Exceptional range of references provided (within the text and at the end of the text). All in accordance with the Harvard method of referencing.

Use of AI in this Assessment

Generative AI is permitted at Solent University under specific conditions and must continue to follow the universitys rules around Academic Misconduct and the AI and Academic Integrity policy. In this assessment, you are allowed to use AI for the following tasks:

• You can use AI to develop the structure of your report by asking for suggested outlines or approaches to organising sections like the introduction, literature review, and conclusions.
• You can use AI for grammar and language checks to improve the clarity and flow of your writing.

Caution

 

• Ensure that the final structure reflects your understanding and adapts to your specific case study
• Your review must be critical and based on reliable academic sources, not AI-generated content. All sources need to be correctly cited using the Solent Harvard referencing style.
• You should use your own critical judgement to evaluate sources. AI cannot replace academic databases; you should rely only on peer-reviewed, credible sources.
• Direct content creation or excessive paraphrasing through AI is prohibited. Ensure the final report reflects your own critical analysis and synthesis of the material.

AI and Academic Integrity Policy

 

Learning Outcomes

This assessment will enable you to demonstrate in full or in part your fulfilment of the following learning outcomes identified in the Module Descriptor.

1. Understand and analyse the role of project management in delivering organisational strategy.
2. Understand and evaluate processes for initiating, planning, and managing projects, including ethical legal and organisational factors.
3. Analyse the factors that contribute to effective project management and identify best practices.
4. Be able to develop a project management plan.

Living CV

As part of the University’s Work Ready, Future Ready strategy, you will be expected to build a professional, Living CV as you successfully engage and pass each module of your degree.

The Living CV outputs evidenced on completion of this assessment are,

1. A developing project manager with an understanding of how project management supports organisational strategy.
2. Skilled in the basics of initiating, planning, and managing projects while considering ethical, legal, and organisational requirements.
3. Capable of identifying and applying best practices to improve project management effectiveness.
4. Able to create clear and structured project management plans that align with specific business objectives.
5. Confident in analysing key factors that contribute to successful project management and offering practical suggestions.
6. Knowledgeable in using project management tools and processes to contribute to successful project outcomes.
7. A strong communicator, able to explain project details and updates clearly to peers and supervisors.
8. Capable of managing simple project risks and ensuring alignment with industry standards and organisational policies.
9. A proactive team player, able to collaborate with others to manage and complete project tasks effectively.
10. Equipped with the skills to track project progress, meet deadlines, and provide regular updates to stakeholders.

Please add these to your CV via the Living CV builder platform on Solent Futures Online Solent Futures Online

Important Information

Solent University Academic Regulations 2024-25

Late Submissions

You are reminded that:

1. If this assessment is submitted late i.e. within 7 calendar days of the submission deadline, the mark will be capped at 40% if a pass mark is achieved.
2. If this assessment is submitted laterthan 7 calendar days after the submission deadline, the work will be regarded as a non-submission and will be awarded a zero.

• If this assessment is being submitted as a referred piece of work, then it mustbe submitted by the deadline date; any Refer assessment submitted late will be regarded as a non-submission and will be awarded a zero.

Assessment regulations

Extenuating Circumstances

The Universitys Extenuating Circumstances (EC) procedure is in place if there are genuine short term exceptional circumstances that may prevent you submitting an assessment. You are able to self-certify for up to two assessment dates in any semester without supporting evidence for an extension of up to seven calendar days for coursework or to defer an exam to the resit period.

Alternatively, if you are not ‘fit to study (or you have used up your two self-certification opportunities), you can request:

• an extension to the submission deadline of 7 calendar days, or
• a request to submit the assessment at the next opportunity, i.e. the resit period (as a Defer without capping of the grade).

In both instances you must submit an EC application with relevant evidence. If accepted under the university regulations, there will be no academic penalty for late submission or non-submission dependent on what is requested. You are reminded that EC covers only short-term issues (20 working days) and that if you experience longer term matters that impact on your learning then you must contact the Student Hub for advice.

Please find a link to the EC policy below:

Extenuating Circumstances

Academic Misconduct

Any submission must be your own work and, where facts or ideas have been used from other sources, these sources must be appropriately referenced. The Universitys Academic Regulations includes the definitions of all practices that will be deemed to constitute academic misconduct. You should check this link before submitting your work.

Procedures relating to student academic misconduct are given below:

Academic Misconduct

Ethics Policy

The work being carried out must be in compliance with the university Ethics Policy. Where there is an ethical issue, as specified within the Ethics Policy, then you will need an ethics release or ethics approval prior to the start of the project.

The Ethics Policy is contained within Section 2S of the Academic Handbook:

Ethics Policy

Grade marking

The University uses an numeric grade scale for the marking of assessments. More detailed information on grade marking and the grade scale can be found on the portal and in the Student Handbook.