ASSIGNMENT TOPIC: House

Renovation
Summary: You are responsible for managing a property renovation project, and need
to address project scheduling, risk assessment, and leadership and motivation issues
for your project.

Word Limit: 3000

This assignment is worth 50% of the total mark for the Project Management
Leadership and Skills module.

Assignment brief

You have recently been appointed by a large property investor in the UK who wishes
to renovate a house. To keep his costs to a minimum he likes to have only one
worker working on each activity. The property renovation involves various tasks
which he estimates will take one worker the times shown in the table below:

Activity Time needed to complete

Substantial repairs to the
8 days
roof
Internal structural work 4 days
Electrical work 7 days
Plumbing 6 days
Installing a new kitchen 3 days
Installing a new bathroom 4 days
Garden 5 days
Plastering 4 days
Internal decoration 5 days
Fitting carpets 1 day
Outside paintwork 5 days

The roof and structural work must be completed before any other activities (inside
or outside) can commence. Once these are done, the external jobs can happen at
any stage. However, inside the house, the plumbing and electrics must be completed
before the plastering can be done. The plastering must be complete before the new
kitchen and bathroom can be installed. Decoration can only happen once the kitchen
and bathroom are in place, and carpets can only be fitted after decorating.

The property developer knows that to keep his budget on target, all work needs to
be completed in 6 weeks. His team only works from Monday to Friday. Can it be
done? Which activities is it most important for the property developer to keep on
track?

The developer has several other projects on the go at the same time and decides
that he can only spare two of his team to work on this project. By assigning activities
to Worker 1 and Worker 2 show how this is possible.

There are three (3) parts to this assignment, and each is worth 33% of the final
assignment mark.

Part 1 – 33%
A. Create a network diagram with the critical path clearly marked
B. What are the advantages to the property developer in using critical path
analysis to plan this project?
C. How realistic is the idea of using only two workers to complete the project
given the deadline of six weeks?

You do not need any specialist knowledge of construction to answer this question.

Part 2 - 33%
Review the case above of The House with regard to risk management.

A. Identify at least 5 risks relevant to this project and create a simple risk table
showing how you would manage these risks with appropriate risk controls
B. Discuss how you would derive a risk score for each of these risks explaining
what evidence you could access to support you calculation of impact and
probability
C. What are the opportunities available and how would you categorise these
strategies?

Please note that you are being assessed on your understanding of risk management
and not the discovery of the ‘correct answer’.

Part 3 – 34%
You have recently hired Kevin, a retired ex-lecturer in project management, to work
as part of your project team on the house build. He is very good at solving technical
project problems but seems to find working in the team very difficult and gives
constant negative feedback on his co-workers. His performance and temper has
become progressively worse over time. He seems to lack motivation and you may
have to consider ending his employment. Why might Kevin lack motivation?
Discuss with reference to appropriate theories and case examples; suggest ways in
which Kevin may be motivated.

Marking scheme

 Criteria Marks

Part 1 33

- A. network diagram 11

- B. critical path discussion 11

- C. discussion of 2 workers/6 11
weeks constraint

Part 2 33

- A. risk analysis 11

- B. risk score discussion 11

- C. opportunities discussion 11

Part 3 34

- Review of theory relating to

12
leadership and motivation

- Examples 11

- Conclusion on ways to motivate

11
Kevin

Further marking guidance

You will also need to take the following into account when completing your
assignment:

• Quality of abstract (does it give a succinct summary of your paper?)

• Allocation of credit and sources used (have I included references and
citations to the material I have used?)
• Clarity of argument and integration of different components of the report
• Overall report presentation including spelling and grammar
• Word processed (letter size 12, times new roman, 1.5 space), fully referenced
(Harvard Referencing System)
Please remember that marks for the assignment will also be awarded in relation to
presentation and structure, and aspects such as use of examples, figures, tables,
illustrations and statistics that indicate wider/independent reading.

Good scholarship
You are required to follow the University’s regulations regarding plagiarism and
citing sources and references used

Module learning outcomes covered by this assignment

1. Locate, synthesise and critically evaluate recent/current information from a
wide range of published literature in Project Management
2. Apply knowledge of the theory and practice of project planning and control
and the use of Project Management methods and techniques.
3. Critically evaluate the use of techniques in leading, planning, control and
process management.

This is an individual assessment worth 50% of the module mark. Word length 3000
words (do not exceed word limit). Do not include the cover page, abstract, table of
contents or References section in the word count

The paper should have a clear structure, with:

- a cover page (student number, module title, assignment title, word count (effective, not
max), declaration of originality
- an abstract (300 words max, one single paragraph)
- a table of contents
- the main body of the paper - you have full creative control over the structure, but do use
section headings to signpost your work
- references list - this is mandatory at Master level

BOOK

Project Management, 4th edition (by Harvey Maylor)

ISBN: 978-0273704324

Search in SOLAR

This book is recommended

90-100
Standard comparable to
journal publication
Outstanding clarity of focus,
includes what is important,
and excludes irrelevant
issues.
Outstanding with critical
awareness of relevance of
issues. Outstanding
expression of ideas.
Comprehensive literature
review. Evaluation and
synthesis of source material
to produce an outstanding
contribution.
Standard of critical analysis
– showing questioning of
sources, understanding of
bias, independence of
thought
Well-structured, compelling
and persuasive argument
that leads to a valuable
contribution to the field of
study, paving the way for
future work.
80-89
Standard comparable to
conference paper
publication
Excellent clarity of focus,
boundaries set with no
significant omissions or
unnecessary issues.
Excellent with critical
awareness of relevance of
issues. Excellent
expression of ideas.
Excellent independent
secondary research.
Sources are evaluated and
synthesized to produce an
excellent contribution.
Excellent standard of
critical analysis –
excellence in questioning
of sources, understanding
of bias, independence of
thought
Argument has excellent
structure and
persuasiveness, leading to
very significant insights
and relevant future work.
70-79
Distinctive work for Masters
level
Clear focus. Very good
setting of boundaries
includes most of what is
relevant.
Very good with critical
awareness of relevance of
issues. Outstanding
expression of ideas.
Very good independent
secondary research. Sources
are evaluated and
synthesized to produce a
very good contribution.
A very good standard of
critical analysis. Sources are
questioned appropriately,
and a very good
understanding of bias,
showing independence of
thought
Well-structured and
persuasive argument
Insightful conclusion draws
together key issues and
possible future work.
60-69
Merit work for Masters
level
Clear scope and focus,
with some omissions or
unnecessary issues.
Good with some
awareness of relevance of
issues. Ideas are
expressed, with some
limitation.
Good secondary research
to extend taught
materials. Evidence of
evaluation of sources, with
some deficiencies in
choice and synthesis.
Critical analysis with some
questioning of sources,
understanding of bias,
independence of thought.
Structured and fairly
convincing argument leads
to conclusion that
summarises key issues.
50-59 40-49 0-39
Acceptable for Masters Below Masters pass Significantly below
standard Masters pass
standard
Scope evident and satisfactory Poorly scoped, with Little or no scope or
but with some omissions and significant omissions focus evident.
unnecessary issues. and unnecessary
issues.
Basic with limited awareness of Poor with little Little or no
relevance of issues. Limited awareness of understanding of
expression of ideas. relevance of issues subject matter is
demonstrated.
Limited secondary research to Little or no extension Poor use of taught
extend taught materials. of taught materials. materials. No
Limited evaluation of sources, Poor choice and synthesis.
deficiencies in choice and synthesis of materials.
synthesis.
Analysis evident but uncritical. Little or no analysis. No valid analysis.
Sources are not always
questioned, with limited
independence of thought.
Argument has some structure Argument is No evidence of
and development towards unstructured, no argument or
conclusion with limitations in recognizable conclusion.
summary of issues. conclusion.