Project program strategy
Project program strategy
For the PPS PMA, the work should be written in the form of a report with numbered headings and sub-headings, a table of contents, page numbers etc. There should be an Introduction and Conclusion section. The work should be free from spelling and grammar errors and should be nicely presented. References should be correctly cited (HARVARD STYLE) and properly formatted in the ‘references’ or ‘bibliography’ section.
With regard to answering your choice of question:
1 Make sure you READ and understand what the question is asking for, break the paragraph into ‘parts’ and ensure that you answer the main ‘parts’. Using numbered headings and sub-headings might help with this in the beginning. Remember to tell your reader what the purpose of the report is and how the work is structured in the Introduction section, and to summarize your main arguments and findings in the Conclusion section.
2 You will need to research a project or programme in the public domain. Government reports, newspapers, consulting reports are all useful in understanding the ‘history’ of the project or programme from a variety of perspectives. Use the ‘best’ references you can find to understand the case and to provide examples of the main points you want to make. Keep the ‘background’ to the case study fairly short- the objective is not about describing the case study in detail. (Remember the class example about the doctor who just repeats the symptoms you told him/her, does nothing else, and then hands you a bill? )
3 Analyse the case study with reference to the techniques, models, methods and wider PPM literature. Depending on the question this may involve arguing that the project or programme was a ‘success’ or not. You might like to discuss/argue what is meant by ‘success’. Use references from the module, wider PPM literature and examples from the case study to support your arguments.
4 Depending on your question, your analysis might identify areas that were well/poorly done (eg risk management, stakeholder engagement, change control, governance, project definition, suppliers & contracts, benefits management etc etc). Identify what the main issues were. Discuss these with reference to the literature/models/techniques and give examples from the case study background. This is NOT about repeating the work and analysis of others. It should be about demonstrating that you can apply the techniques/methods/models etc to analyse a case study, and that you can justify or support your analysis and arguments with reference to the literature and case study. The question may ask you to suggest how this problems could have been avoided- if so,give examples and references to the methods/methodologies/ literature/techniques etc.
5 Make sure that you ‘sign-post’ your arguments for your reader. Take them with you through your main arguments and evidence to the conclusions or points you are arguing.
Go back and read point (1) above. Make sure that you have answered the question as it was set. Make sure that you have written a Conclusion section, spell-checked and proof-read your work before submission.
(i) Research and analyse the conduct of the following high-profile projects/programmes: (30 marks)
The UK ‘Fire control’ project
(ii) Discuss what is meant by ‘successful’ and whether the project/ programme you have selected was OR was NOT considered successful, and
(iii) Analyse and discuss some of the factors or practices that contributed to this outcome (successful/not successful). To what extent are these a result of good/poor project/programme strategy? Illustrate your answer with examples from the case study and theory.
(iv) Suggest how utilisation of programme or project ‘best practice or theory’ either contributed to the success or might have improved the situation/ avoided the problems.
(i) Research and analyse the programme that created the BBC W1 Programme (Phases 1 & 2) which delivered in 2012. (30%)
(ii) Discuss why this programme was considered successful, to what degree you agree that that is so, and the ways in which good programme strategy may have contributed (70%)