ASSESSMENT 2 BRIEF
Subject Code and Title PROJ6004 Contracts and Procurement
Assessment Case Study Analysis and Individual Report
Individual/Group Individual
Length 2400 words (+/- 10%)
Learning Outcomes The Subject Learning Outcomes demonstrated by successful completion of the task below include:
a) Critically evaluate the risks associated with contract and procurement management approaches
b) Evaluate procurement requirements to formulate procurement processes in order to initiate contracts
c) Critically analyse and identify the responsibilities of the role of the procurement manager and project manager necessary to ensure project outcomes
Submission Due by 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Sunday end of Module 4 (Module 4.4; Week 8 for 12 week sessions; Week 4 for six week sessions).
Weighting 40%
Total Marks 40 marks
Assessment Task
Critically reflect on the assigned case study available from either the Subject Learning Resources tab on the course homepage, or will be sent to you by the LF as an announcement. Read the Module 1-4 learning resources. Individually write a 2400-word report which summarises the important procurement context of the case study. Your report must also identify the procurement complexities of the case study, proposing mitigations and possible learnings.
Please refer to the instructions for details on how to complete this task.
Context
Procurement and contracts are integral to successful project management. While no two project environments are exactly alike, particularly in their approaches to procurement, learning from case studies can help develop benchmarking practices and apply lessons learned.
Procurements , acquisitions, requests for proposal, vendor selection, contract administration, and contract closure are integral parts of the process. Learning from case studies and benchmarking against better practices, standards and excellence is vital to understand complexity of issues and successful strategies for procurement and contract management. It will also ensure improved responsiveness to key issues, promote supplier client relationships through proactive management of risks and ultimately deliver higher levels of focus on performance-based outcomes.
Assessment 2 is an individual report which will provide you the opportunity to apply insights formed from your review of the assigned case study, combining with insights formed during your interaction with fellow students after engagement in the discussion board forum for Assessment 1.
These insights encourage a deeper understanding of the challenges faced by the project team in managing large, or complex projects, particularly when adopting procurement methodologies that involve private- public sector finance to deliver complex projects. This is an increasingly common method of stakeholder involvement where global financial and procurement capability to innovatively build public infrastructure and facilities meets the needs of the growing population. You are also encouraged to understand and explore any related organisational issues, stakeholders and the funding and finance aspects associated with the project.
Assessment 2 is about uncovering complexities in procurement and contract contexts generally, identifying key issues, looking at leadership, governance and key themes that will allow improved focus, and learning. You are also encouraged to understand and explore the related organisational issues, stakeholders and the funding and finance aspects associated with projects.
Instructions
Assessment 2 Individual Report (overall 2,400 Words, +/- 10%) is designed around analysing the procurement in the case study project. This assessment comprises of three parts:
• Part A: Introduce and summarise the procurement context and scope (life cycle journey of the case study project). Identify the project procurement components and tender evaluation that may have been used in the case study (according to your knowledge from the theory you have studied).
• Part B: Describe the complexities (and key issues/risks), discuss the project environment and organisation aspects, leadership and governance and how these have influenced outcomes.
• Part C: Identify or suggest key mitigations and possible learnings. Explain how those learnings may require changes to roles and responsibilities of key project resources, changes to procurement briefs or scope specification.
Referencing
It is essential that you use appropriate APA style for citing and referencing research. Please see more information on referencing here https://library.torrens.edu.au/academicskills/apa/tool
Submission Instructions
Submit this task via the Assessment 2 link in the main navigation menu in PROJ6004 – Contracts and Procurement. The Learning Facilitator will provide feedback via the Grade Centre in the LMS portal. Feedback can be viewed in My Grades.
Academic Integrity Declaration
I declare that except where I have referenced, the work I am submitting for this assessment task is my own work. I have read and am aware of Torrens University Australia Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure viewable online at http://www.torrens.edu.au/policies-and-forms
I am aware that I need to keep a copy of all submitted material and their drafts, and I will do so accordingly.
Assessment Rubric
Assessment Attributes Fail
(Yet to achieve minimum standard) 0-49% Pass
(Functional)
50-64% Credit
(Proficient) 65-74% Distinction
(Advanced)
75-84% High Distinction
(Exceptional)
85-100%
Knowledge and understanding of contract and procurement approaches, risks, and
roles
Percentage for this
criterion = 30%
10%
Presents a limited or incomplete summary of the project procurement context and scope, components, and tender evaluation that may have been used in the case study. Presents a functional summary of the project procurement context and scope, components, and tender evaluation that may have been used in the case study. Presents a thorough summary of the project procurement context and scope, components, and tender evaluation that may have been used in the case study. Presents a highly developed summary of the project procurement context and scope, components, and tender evaluation that may have been used in the case study. Presents a sophisticated summary of the project procurement context and scope, components, and tender evaluation that may have been used in the case study.
10%
Presents a limited or incomplete description of the complexities,
issues/risks, project environment and organisation aspects, leadership and governance and how these have influenced outcomes. Presents a functional description of the complexities, issues/risks, project environment and organisation aspects, leadership and governance and how these have influenced outcomes. Presents a thorough description of the complexities, issues/risks, project environment and organisation aspects, leadership and governance and how these have influenced outcomes. Presents a highly developed description of the complexities, issues/risks, project environment and organisation aspects, leadership and governance and how these have influenced outcomes. Presents a sophisticated description of the complexities, issues/risks, project environment and organisation aspects, leadership and governance and how these have influenced outcomes.
10%
Suggests limited or incomplete mitigations and possible learnings that explain potential changes to roles and responsibilities, procurement briefs or scope specification. Suggests functional mitigations and possible learnings that explain potential changes to roles and responsibilities, procurement briefs or scope specification. Suggests thorough mitigations and possible learnings that explain potential changes to roles and responsibilities, procurement briefs or scope specification. Suggests highly developed mitigations and possible learnings that explain potential changes to roles and responsibilities, procurement briefs or scope specification.
Suggests sophisticated mitigations and possible learnings that explain potential changes to roles and responsibilities, procurement briefs or scope specification.
Analysis and application with synthesis of new
knowledge
Percentage for this
criterion = 20%
10%
Limited synthesis and analysis. Demonstrated analysis and synthesis of new knowledge with application. Well-developed analysis and synthesis with application of recommendations linked to analysis/synthesis. Thoroughly developed and creative analysis and synthesis with application of pretested procurement methodologies and models Highly sophisticated and creative analysis, synthesis of new with existing knowledge.
10%
Limited application/recommendat ions based upon analysis. Shows the ability to interpret relevant information and literature. Analysed and evaluated relevant information and literature. Independently developed models and justified recommendations linked to analysis/synthesis. Strong application by way of pretested procurement methodologies/models and
/ or independently developed models. Recommendations are
clearly justified based on the analysis/synthesis. Applying knowledge to new situations/other cases.
Evaluation of information selected to
support the case study
Percentage for this
criterion = 30%
10%
Limited understanding of key procurement methodologies/strategies and other relevant concepts required to support the case study. Resembles a recall or summary of key procurement ideas. Supports personal opinion and information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials. Discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading. Systematically and critically discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading.
10%
Confuses logic and emotion. Information taken from reliable sources but without a coherent analysis or synthesis. Often conflates/confuses assertion of personal opinion with information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials. Demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply procurement
methodologies/strategies and other relevant concepts. Well demonstrated capacity
to explain and apply relevant procurement methodologies and concepts. Information is taken from sources with a high level of interpretation/evaluation to develop a comprehensive critical analysis or synthesis.
10%
Viewpoints of experts are taken as fact with little questioning.
Analysis and evaluation do not reflect expert judgement, intellectual independence, rigor and adaptability. Identifies logical flaws and questions viewpoints of experts. Viewpoint of experts are subject to questioning. Analysis and evaluation reflect growing judgement, intellectual independence, rigor and adaptability. Identifies gaps in knowledge and exhibits intellectual independence, rigor, good judgement and adaptability.
Effective
Communication
(Written)
Percentage for this
criterion = 10%
5%
Meaning is repeatedly obscured by errors in the communication of ideas, including errors in structure, sequence, spelling, grammar and/or punctuation Meaning is sometimes difficult to follow.
Information, arguments and evidence are structured and sequenced in a way that is not always clear and logical. Some errors are evident in spelling, grammar and/or punctuation. Meaning is easy to follow. Occasional minor errors
present in spelling, grammar and/or punctuation. Accurately employs specialised language and terminology. Engages audience interest. Information, arguments and evidence are structured and sequenced in a way that is, clear and persuasive. Spelling, grammar and punctuation are free from errors. Engages and sustains audience’s interest. Information, arguments and evidence are insightful, persuasive and expertly presented. Spelling, grammar and punctuation are free from errors.
5%
Specialised language and terminology is rarely or inaccurately employed. Generally employs specialised language and terminology with accuracy. Information, arguments and evidence are structured and sequenced in a way that is clear and logical. Accurately employs a wide range of specialised language and terminology. Discerningly selects and precisely employs a wide range of specialised language and terminology
Correct citation of key
resources and evidence
Percentage for this
criterion = 10%
5%
Demonstrates inconsistent use of good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas. Demonstrates use of credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas, but these are not always explicit or well developed. Demonstrates use of credible resources to support and develop ideas. Demonstrates use of good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop arguments and statements. Demonstrates use of highquality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop arguments and position statements.
5%
Referencing is omitted or does not resemble APA. Referencing resembles APA, with frequent or repeated errors. Referencing resembles APA, with occasional errors. APA referencing is free from errors. APA referencing is free from errors.
The following Subject Learning Outcomes are addressed in this assessment
SLO a) Critically evaluate the risks associated with contract and procurement management approaches
SLO b) Evaluate procurement requirements to formulate procurement processes in order to initiate contracts
SLO c) Critically analyse and identify the responsibilities of the role of the procurement manager and project manager necessary to ensure project outcomes
