Order Description

1)i) Research and analyse the conduct of the high-profile programme/project: The UK new Wembley stadium project.

ii) Discuss the problems encountered consequent of errors in the programme or project strategy and planning.

iii) Suggest how utilisation of programme or project strategy best practice might have improved the situation or even avoided the problems.

This is a postgraduate assignment so high standards are expected. The answer should have a brief executive summary (about 100 words) at the start.

The total word count should be shared quite evenly amongst the three questions.

Each question answered should be broken down into clear headings or subheadings and a table of contents should be given.

A file is attached which gives guidelines and some useful references but the assignment should not be limited to that.

All sources used should contain the correct reference and no part of the assignment should be copied and pasted to avoid plagiarism.

Hints & Tips

Programme strategy in this context refers to the setting up of the programme. This is the initiation, design and planning of the programme and the processes and practices to execute the programme. It considers WHY the programme is needed, WHAT the programme will deliver and HOW the programme will be run and managed. The WHY is often linked to the Business Case, strategic goals, vision statement and benefits, the WHAT is the BOOP Map and the list of projects (the project dossier), and the Blueprints. The Programme plan, benefits realisation plan, and the tranche plan (schedule) specify the WHEN. The HOW is sometimes called the GOVERNANCE Framework and covers the programme and project organisation, roles and responsibilities and the processes, practices and standards that will be used in managing the programme and projects. The risk management strategy often defines the ‘WHAT IF’. For further details on ‘governance framework’ see MSP (2007, 2011) Governance Themes.

There are different areas that could be considered when answering the questions, some of which are:

•    Is it actually a programme or just a large project?  Was it managed as a programme or a project? What are the implications if it was managed as a project when it should have been managed as a business-change programme? What evidence can you cite to support your arguments?

•    If it was a project- what determines ‘success’? What are ‘generic’ success factors applicable to all projects? What are the critical success factors (CSFs) that apply to this specific project? If it was a programme, what determines success? Who decides? What role do stakeholders play in the process?

•    How does the governance structure (or governance framework) contribute to success?  What role does BOOP mapping play in designing the programme and projects? What role do benefits play? Is benefits management important? Is risk management important? What is the importance of product change control etc.?  (These are all parts of a governance framework)

So, if the argument says that it was a success- what evidence and arguments can be provided to support the position?   References should be made to the course materials and the wider project/programme management literature and ‘best practices’ to analyse and evaluate the case study.   What aspects of the project/programme design and planning contributed to the success? What areas could have been improved? Simply describing the case study or writing a case history will NOT be sufficient to gain a pass.  A good critical analysis and well-supported or evidenced arguments should be given. Remember to support findings and conclusions with reference to the literature and theory.

Sources

APM Programme Management Specific Interest Group (2013) Introduction to Programme Management, Association for Project Management; First edition (30 Oct 2007)

Bartlett, J. (2002). Managing Programmes of Business Change: A Handbook of the Principles of Programme Management. Project Manager Today Publications.

Brown, J.T (2014) The Handbook of Program Management: How to Facilitate Project Success with Optimal Program Management, McGraw-Hill Professional; 2nd Second Edition also 1st edition (2008) Views programmes as a collection of projects.

Morris, PWG and Pinto, JK and Söderlund, J, (eds.) (2011) The Oxford Handbook of Project Management, Oxford University Press

Project Management Institute (2013) The Standard for Programme Management, Project Management Institute; 3rd edition

Reiss, G. (Ed.). (2006). Gower Handbook of programme management. Gower Publishing, Ltd.

Reiss, G. & Raynor, P. (2012) Portfolio and Programme Management Demystified: Managing Multiple Projects Successfully, Routledge; 2nd edition

Tends towards view of programmes as collection of projects.

Snowden, Rod & Cabinet Office (2011) Managing Successful Programmes, Stationery Office; 4th ed., 2011 edition (30 Aug 2011)

Thiry, M. (2010) Programme Management, Gower Publishing Ltd

Williams, D, & Parr, T. (2003). Enterprise programme management: delivering value. Palgrave Macmillan.

Pinto Slevin 1987 Balancing Strategy and Tactics in Project Implementation

Association for Project Management, A Guide to the Governance aspects of Project Sponsorship,

Association for Project Management, (2014) Directing Change: A Guide to Governance of Project Management, 2nd edition

Association for Project Management, (2014) Co-directing Change: A Guide to the Governance of Multi-Owned Projects

César, B. (1998). Managing sensitive projects: A lateral approach. Psychology Press.

Littau,P. Jujagiri, N., Adlbrecht, G., (2010) “25 Years of Stakeholder Theory in Project Management Literature (1984-2009)”, Project Management Journal, Sept 2010

Morris, PWG and Pinto, JK and Söderlund, J, (eds.) (2011) The Oxford Handbook of Project Management. Oxford University Press

Muller, R. (2009) Project Governance: Fundamentals of Project Management, Gower Publications

Porter,M (1996) “What is strategy?”, Harvard Business Review, Nov-Dec 1996

Pellegrinelli, S. (1997). Programme management: organising project-based change. International Journal of Project Management, 15(3), 141-149.

Pellegrinelli, S. Partington,D., Hemingway, C., Mohdzain,Z.,& Mahmood Shah (2007) “The importance of context in programme management: An empirical review of programme practices.” International Journal of Project Management 25, no. 1 (2007): 41-55.

Patanakul, P.and Shenhar, A. (2002) “What Project Strategy Really Is: The Fundamental Building Block in Strategic Project Management” Project Management Journal, Feb 2002

Turner, R. (2003) Contracting for Project Management, Gower Publishing Ltd; New edition: Sep 2003

Walley, P (2013) “Stakeholder management: the sociodynamic approach”, International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, Vol. 6 No. 3, 2013, pp. 485-504

Topic: Programme and Project Strategy
Order Description
Post Module Assignment

You may elect to answer ONE of the following questions:

QUESTION 1:

(i) Research and analyse the conduct of ONE of the following high-profile projects/programmes: (30 marks)

a) The Hong Kong International Airport (Chep Lak Kok) project
b) The UK ‘Fire control’ project
c) The BBC Digital Media Initiative(DMI), (2008-2013)

Then:

(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.
(70 Marks)

QUESTION 2:

(i) Research and analyse the programme that created the BBC W1 Programme (Phases 1 & 2) which delivered in 2012. (30%)

Then:

(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%)

COMPLETION DATE:

To be submitted electronically using the appropriate web-form available from https://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/sci/wmg/ftmsc/postmodulework/submissions/ and following the guidelines provided in your handbook BEFORE 09:00 on 18th January 2016.
PLEASE NOTE

1. PMW received after 09:00 will be stamped as having arrived on the next working day.

2. Post Module Work which does not reach WMG by the due date will be considered to be late. Penalties for lateness may be applied at the rate of 3 percentage points per University working day after the due date, up to a maximum of 14 days late. After this period the work may be counted as a non-submission.
Complete your assignment from here (heading styles have been set up to assist you in this work) (Delete the instructions in this font before you save and submit your work):

MODULE TITLE

Table of Contents
1 Heading 1 – Suggested that you use this for each Question answered 5
1.1 Heading 2 – suggested that you use this for each sub-heading in each question answered 5
1.1.1 Heading 3 – you may use this heading as appropriate 5

Enter a page break here and between each question

1 Heading 1 – Suggested that you use this for each Question answered

1.1 Heading 2 – suggested that you use this for each sub-heading in each question answered

1.1.1 Heading 3 – you may use this heading as appropriate
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.