QSO 640 Milestone One Guidelines and Rubric
Overview: In the final project, you will develop a complete project plan for a hypothetical organization. Each milestone assignment will help you complete portions of the final project. In this milestone, you will analyze the Fabricant Manufacturing Project (case study available in MindEdge) and begin tasks related to initiation. You will first define the project in the project charter during the project initiation phase. Prompt: The goal of this milestone is to apply project management skills acquired in the first three modules to a real-world project or situation. The analysis of the Fabricant Manufacturing Project should include an evaluation of the selection criteria, alignment with the organization strategic goals, project charter elements, project initiation approval, and stakeholder analysis (Template). Specifically the following critical elements must be addressed:
I. Project Initiation A. Identify the economic, technical, and organizational feasibility of the project. For instance, how is the project a viable fit within the organization? B. Explain how the project aligns to the organization’s strategic goals. C. Develop a project charter that includes a high-level scope of what is to be accomplished. D. Create a high-level timeline and cost estimate to complete the project. E. Identify the concerns of the internal and external key project stakeholders. F. Compare the level of support from all key project stakeholders to inform the course of action resulting in success of the project. G. Complete the stakeholder analysis template.
Guidelines for Submission: Your draft of the Project Initiation portion of your final project should adhere to the following formatting requirements: 3–4 pages, double-spaced, using 12-point Times New Roman font and one-inch margins. Utilize table(s) within your document as you create the high-level timeline and cost estimate. You should use current APA-style guidelines for your citations and a reference list with a minimum of two sources. Instructor Feedback: This activity uses an integrated rubric in Blackboard. Students can view instructor feedback in the Grade Center. For more information, review these instructions.
Critical Elements Proficient (100%) Needs Improvement (75%) Not Evident (0%) Value Project Initiation:
Feasibility Identifies the economic, technical, and organizational feasibility of the project and how the project is a viable fit within the organization
Identifies the economic, technical, and organizational feasibility of the project, but does not discuss how the project is a viable fit within the organization or is inaccurate or cursory
Does not identify the economic, technical, and organizational feasibility of the project
10
Project Initiation: Strategic Goals
Explains how the project aligns to the organization’s strategic goals
Explains how the project aligns to the organization’s strategic goals, but explanation is inaccurate or cursory
Does not describe how the project aligns to the organization’s strategic goals
15
Project Initiation: Project Charter
Develops a project charter that includes a high-level scope of what is to be accomplished and is detailed appropriately
Develops a project charter, but does not include a high-level scope of what is to be accomplished
Does not develop a project charter 15
Project Initiation: High-Level Timeline
Creates a high-level timeline and estimate of cost to complete the project
Creates a high-level timeline and estimate of cost to complete the project, but response contains inaccuracies
Does not create a high-level timeline or estimate of cost to complete the project
15
Project Initiation: Key Project Stakeholders
Identifies the concerns of key project internal and external stakeholders
Identifies the concerns of key project internal and external stakeholders, but response either contains inaccuracies or is overgeneralized
Does not identify the concerns of key project stakeholders
10
Project Initiation: Support
Compares the level of support from all key stakeholders to inform the course of action of the project
Compares the level of support from all key stakeholders, but discussion contains gaps or inaccuracies
Does not compare the level of support from all key stakeholders
15
Project Initiation: Stakeholder Analysis
Template
Completes the stakeholder analysis template
Completes the stakeholder analysis template, but template contains inaccuracies
Does not complete the stakeholder analysis template
10
Articulation of Response
Submission has no major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization
Submission has major errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that negatively impact readability and articulation of main ideas
Submission has critical errors related to citations, grammar, spelling, syntax, or organization that prevent understanding of ideas
10
Total 100%
Grading Rubric for Cognitive Journal Entries
Dimension
Sophisticated Competent Needs Work
Content Entry topic (behavior) is
clearly stated, and completely
and clearly outlined. Topic
(behavior) selected is highly
relevant to chapter’s content
and connection between the
two is clear. Relationship
between topic (behavior) and
chapter theory is clearly
articulated and accurate.
Author's underlying logic is
explicit, and his or her
observation(s) help the reader
see things in a new light. 10-8
pts
Entry topic (behavior) is clearly stated,
and relevant to chapter’s content.
Connection between the two is mostly
clear and complete – there are some
unclear components or some minor
errors in the linkage.
Author's observations are mostly clear,
yet some aspects may not be connected
or minor errors in logic are present.
Author's presentation exposes the
reader to an interesting perspective.
7-5 pts
Entry topic (behavior) is vague, and/or
inconsistently (or only superficially) related to, or
not relevant to chapter’s theories; relational
components are missing or are inaccurate or
unclear. Topic (behavior) is not clearly
articulated and/or has incorrect or incomplete
components with regards to a relationship with
chapter’s theories. Author's observation(s) may
not be clear and the connection with chapter
theory may be incorrect or unclear or just a
repetition of chapter content without explanation
and/or linkage. Underlying logic is flawed. 4-0
pts
Comprehensibility Entry is completely under-
standable, and intellectually
communicated. 5-4 pts
Entry is understandable for the most
part and effectively communicated.
3-2 pts
Entry is difficult to grasp, somewhat beyond
understanding, and ineffectively communicated.
1-0 pts
Effort Entry exceeds assignment
requirements and significant
scholarly effort has been
employed. 5-4 pts
Entry meets assignment requirements
per syllabus and instructor guidance,
and acceptable scholarly effort has been
employed. 3-2 pts
Entry partially fulfills, or does not meet
assignment requirements and scholarly effort is
lacking. 1-0 pts
Writing
(organization,
grammar,
mechanics,
spelling, etc.)
Entry is coherently organized
and the logic is easy to follow.
No spelling or grammatical
errors and terminology is
clearly defined. Writing is
clear, concise and persuasive.
5-4 pts
Entry is generally well organized and
for the most part, easy to follow. There
are few spelling and/or grammatical
errors, or undefined terms. Writing is
mostly clear, but may lack conciseness.
3-2 pts
Entry is poorly organized and difficult to read –
does not flow logically from one part to another.
There are several spelling and/or grammatical
errors; technical terms may not be defined, or are
poorly defined. Writing lacks clarity and
conciseness. 1-0 pts
Maximum points: 25

Get help from top-rated tutors in any subject.
Efficiently complete your homework and academic assignments by getting help from the experts at homeworkarchive.com