+1-817-968-5551
+61-488-839-671
+44-7480-542904About Expert
Key Topics
Assessment 1 Projects Negotiation and Conflict Report Criteria
Your assignment will be assessed on the extent and quality to which it meets each of the following criteria.
• Complete documentation is supplied. (20%)
• The project negotiation, conflict management, and stakeholder engagement is an accurate reflection of the requirements outlined in the case study. (30%)
• The methods of identifying and reconciling inconsistent and conflicting objectives and drivers that develop, maintain, mange relationships and communication with key stakeholders is an accurate reflection of the requirements outlined in the case study. (30%)
• Appropriate and well structured, concise and clear expression of project management requirements in response to the assessment task. (10%)
• Clarity of expression, grammar and spelling. (10%)
For details, please read unit profile (learning outcomes, assessment details, assessment criteria, etc) and portfolio instructions.
Your assignment will be assessed on the extent and quality to which it meets each of the following criteria.
• Complete documentation is supplied. (20%)
• The project negotiation, conflict management, and stakeholder engagement is an accurate reflection of the requirements outlined in the case study. (30%)
• The methods of identifying and reconciling inconsistent and conflicting objectives and drivers that develop, maintain, mange relationships and communication with key stakeholders is an accurate reflection of the requirements outlined in the case study. (30%)
• Appropriate and well structured, concise and clear expression of project management requirements in response to the assessment task. (10%)
• Clarity of expression, grammar and spelling. (10%)
For details, please read unit profile (learning outcomes, assessment details, assessment criteria, etc) and portfolio instructions.
2 The Projects
Place Order For A Top Grade Assignment Now
We have some amazing discount offers running for the students
Place Your OrderFor all of these projects, the four quadrant model proposed by Turner & Cochrane (1993) and discussed in Lloyd-Walker & Walker (2015) has employed for determining the project characteristics. The same is on account of the reason that the model proposed by Turner & Cochrane (1993) offer much more realistic and relevant guidance as compared to other models and they are much more relevant to the case of Queensland Health payroll systems as discussed under KPMG (2012).
2.1 Project 1: Forward strategy for payroll system
Project 1 concerns the design, development, documentation and ensuring suitable approvals for the forward strategy concerning payroll system.
Project 1 concerns the design, development, documentation and ensuring suitable approvals for the forward strategy concerning payroll system.
Hence, the project characteristics of the project 1 as per Turner & Cochrane (1993) model is project development project / water on account of the overall fluidity / general nature of the approach towards the outcome while the expected outcome are to the most extent clear.
2.2 Project 2: Governance and decision-making
Project 2 concerns the design, development and establishment of effective and suitable form of governance as well as decision making structure.
2.2 Project 2: Governance and decision-making
Project 2 concerns the design, development and establishment of effective and suitable form of governance as well as decision making structure.
Hence, the project characteristics of the project 1 as per Turner & Cochrane (1993) model is project development project / water on account of the overall fluidity / general nature of the approach towards the outcome while the expected outcome are to the most extent clear.
2.3 Project 3: People and change
Project 3 concerns the planning and undertaking people related cultural and organizational changes.
Project 3 concerns the planning and undertaking people related cultural and organizational changes.
Hence, the project characteristics of the project 1 as per Turner & Cochrane (1993) model is project development project / water on account of the overall fluidity / general nature of the approach towards the outcome while the expected outcome are to the most extent clear.
2.4 Project 4: Funding
Project 4 concerns the estimation / projection of the funding needs and suitably sourcing the funds.
Project 4 concerns the estimation / projection of the funding needs and suitably sourcing the funds.
Hence, the project characteristics of the project 1 as per Turner & Cochrane (1993) model is engineering project / earth on account of the definiteness in terms of the approach that can be taken as well as the final outcome that is expected. .
3 The Participants
3.1 Project 1: Forward strategy for payroll system
In case of Project 1, the owners shall be the senior management who are framing the forward strategy, with designers being various functional managers who shall aid in the strategy development as well as its functional level dissemination, and the contractors shall be external consultants who offer domain expertise support.
3.1.1 Owner
The negotiating position of the owner will be with respect to cost, scope, and schedule.
The potential conflicts in relationships that the owner may have are any cost variances, schedule variances and quality variances
3.1.2 Designers
The negotiating position of the designers will be with respect to method.
3.1.2 Designers
The negotiating position of the designers will be with respect to method.
The potential conflicts in relationships that the owner may have are the delivery and quality of the method.
3.1.3 Contractors
The negotiating position of the contractors will be with respect to operations.
The negotiating position of the contractors will be with respect to operations.
The potential conflicts in relationships that the owner may have are the delivery, cost / time and quality of the operations.
3.2 Project 2: Governance and decision-making
In case of Project 2, the owners shall be the external committee setup by the governments who shall be designing and developing the suitable decision making / governance structure, with designers being various senior management / function heads who shall aid in this process and implementation, and the contractors shall be external consultants who offer domain expertise support.
In case of Project 2, the owners shall be the external committee setup by the governments who shall be designing and developing the suitable decision making / governance structure, with designers being various senior management / function heads who shall aid in this process and implementation, and the contractors shall be external consultants who offer domain expertise support.
3.2.1 Owner
The negotiating position of the owner will be with respect to cost, scope, and schedule.
The negotiating position of the owner will be with respect to cost, scope, and schedule.
The potential conflicts in relationships that the owner may have are any cost variances, schedule variances and quality variances
3.2.2 Designers
The negotiating position of the designers will be with respect to method.
The negotiating position of the designers will be with respect to method.
The potential conflicts in relationships that the owner may have are the delivery and quality of the method.
3.2.3 Contractors
The negotiating position of the contractors will be with respect to operations.
3.2.3 Contractors
The negotiating position of the contractors will be with respect to operations.
The potential conflicts in relationships that the owner may have are the delivery, cost / time and quality of the operations.
3.3 Project 3: People and change
In case of Project 3, the owners shall be the senior management who are developing the people and organizational level cultural changes, with designers being various functional managers who shall aid in the implementation of the action plan for the change, and the contractors shall be external consultants who offer domain expertise support.
In case of Project 3, the owners shall be the senior management who are developing the people and organizational level cultural changes, with designers being various functional managers who shall aid in the implementation of the action plan for the change, and the contractors shall be external consultants who offer domain expertise support.
3.3.1 Owner
The negotiating position of the owner will be with respect to cost, scope, and schedule.
The negotiating position of the owner will be with respect to cost, scope, and schedule.
The potential conflicts in relationships that the owner may have are any cost variances, schedule variances and quality variances
3.3.2 Designers
The negotiating position of the designers will be with respect to method.
The negotiating position of the designers will be with respect to method.
The potential conflicts in relationships that the owner may have are the delivery and quality of the method.
3.3.3 Contractors
The negotiating position of the contractors will be with respect to operations.
The negotiating position of the contractors will be with respect to operations.
The potential conflicts in relationships that the owner may have are the delivery, cost / time and quality of the operations.
3.4 Project 4: Funding
In case of Project 4, the owners shall be the chief financial officer and his office who shall project funding needs, determine funding sources and direct the sourcing process, with designers being the corporate treasury manager who shall aid in the actual sourcing of the funds by way of liaison, affiliated actions, etc. and the contractors shall be investment bankers who offer suitable advisory.
In case of Project 4, the owners shall be the chief financial officer and his office who shall project funding needs, determine funding sources and direct the sourcing process, with designers being the corporate treasury manager who shall aid in the actual sourcing of the funds by way of liaison, affiliated actions, etc. and the contractors shall be investment bankers who offer suitable advisory.
3.4.1 Owner
The negotiating position of the owner will be with respect to cost, scope, and schedule.
The negotiating position of the owner will be with respect to cost, scope, and schedule.
The potential conflicts in relationships that the owner may have are any cost variances, schedule variances and quality variances
3.4.2 Designers
The negotiating position of the designers will be with respect to method.
The negotiating position of the designers will be with respect to method.
The potential conflicts in relationships that the owner may have are the delivery and quality of the method.
3.4.3 Contractors
The negotiating position of the contractors will be with respect to operations.
The negotiating position of the contractors will be with respect to operations.
The potential conflicts in relationships that the owner may have are the delivery, cost / time and quality of the operations.
4 The Negotiation Interaction Process
4.1 Project 1: Forward strategy for payroll system
With respect to project 1, as per Alfredson & Cungu (2008), the proposed negotiation position shall be strategic approach on account of the fact the overall context and outcome pursued are strategic in nature.
With respect to project 1, as per Alfredson & Cungu (2008), the proposed negotiation position shall be strategic approach on account of the fact the overall context and outcome pursued are strategic in nature.
4.2 Project 2: Governance and +decision-making
With respect to project 1, as per Alfredson & Cungu (2008), the proposed negotiation position shall be structural approach, as the project area focusses on developing robust and reliable governance and decision making capabilities that are compliance focussed.
With respect to project 1, as per Alfredson & Cungu (2008), the proposed negotiation position shall be structural approach, as the project area focusses on developing robust and reliable governance and decision making capabilities that are compliance focussed.
4.3 Project 3: People and change
With respect to project 1, as per Alfredson & Cungu (2008), the proposed negotiation position shall be behavioural approach as the project area and relevant priorities rely upon the people and cultural factors at the project organization.
With respect to project 1, as per Alfredson & Cungu (2008), the proposed negotiation position shall be behavioural approach as the project area and relevant priorities rely upon the people and cultural factors at the project organization.
4.4 Project 4: Funding
With respect to project 1, as per Alfredson & Cungu (2008), the proposed negotiation position shall be concessional exchange approach on account of the fact that project outcome to be attained are transactional in nature.
With respect to project 1, as per Alfredson & Cungu (2008), the proposed negotiation position shall be concessional exchange approach on account of the fact that project outcome to be attained are transactional in nature.
5 The Negotiation Methods
5.1 Project 1: Forward strategy for payroll system
By employing the strategic approach to negotiation, in the project 2, the concerned negotiation method shall employ the organized approached proposed by Alfredson & Cungu (2008) involving identification of the interests, understand the people involved and their expectations, assess alternatives, determine the available options, setting criteria / legitimacy, establishing commitments, employing effective communication and finally reaching the desired communication.
By employing the strategic approach to negotiation, in the project 2, the concerned negotiation method shall employ the organized approached proposed by Alfredson & Cungu (2008) involving identification of the interests, understand the people involved and their expectations, assess alternatives, determine the available options, setting criteria / legitimacy, establishing commitments, employing effective communication and finally reaching the desired communication.
5.2 Project 2: Governance and decision-making
By employing the structured approach to negotiation, in the project 2, the concerned negotiation method shall employ the organized approached proposed by Alfredson & Cungu (2008) involving identification of the interests, understand the people involved and their expectations, assess alternatives, determine the available options, setting criteria / legitimacy, establishing commitments, employing effective communication and finally reaching the desired communication.
By employing the structured approach to negotiation, in the project 2, the concerned negotiation method shall employ the organized approached proposed by Alfredson & Cungu (2008) involving identification of the interests, understand the people involved and their expectations, assess alternatives, determine the available options, setting criteria / legitimacy, establishing commitments, employing effective communication and finally reaching the desired communication.
5.3 Project 3: People and change
By employing the behavioural approach to negotiation, in the project 2, the concerned negotiation method shall employ the organized approached proposed by Alfredson & Cungu (2008) involving identification of the interests, understand the people involved and their expectations, assess alternatives, determine the available options, setting criteria / legitimacy, establishing commitments, employing effective communication and finally reaching the desired communication.
By employing the behavioural approach to negotiation, in the project 2, the concerned negotiation method shall employ the organized approached proposed by Alfredson & Cungu (2008) involving identification of the interests, understand the people involved and their expectations, assess alternatives, determine the available options, setting criteria / legitimacy, establishing commitments, employing effective communication and finally reaching the desired communication.
5.4 Project 4: Funding
By employing the concessional approach to negotiation, in the project 2, the concerned negotiation method shall employ the organized approached proposed by Alfredson & Cungu (2008) involving identification of the interests, understand the people involved and their expectations, assess alternatives, determine the available options, setting criteria / legitimacy, establishing commitments, employing effective communication and finally reaching the desired communication.
By employing the concessional approach to negotiation, in the project 2, the concerned negotiation method shall employ the organized approached proposed by Alfredson & Cungu (2008) involving identification of the interests, understand the people involved and their expectations, assess alternatives, determine the available options, setting criteria / legitimacy, establishing commitments, employing effective communication and finally reaching the desired communication.
6 The Outcome
6.1 Project 1: Forward strategy for payroll system/
The preferred form of procurement as an outcome from the negotiation process for Project 1 is Traditional –Segregated Design & Delivery Procurement Forms.
This project by its very nature needs flexibility with respect to strategy related changes as well as the designer undertaking strategy proposals and hence the cost reimbursements (cost-plus) sub-form if proposed (Lloyd-Walker & Walker, 2015).
6.2 Project 2: Governance and decision-making
The preferred form of procurement as an outcome from the negotiation process for Project 2 is Traditional –Segregated Design & Delivery Procurement Forms
The preferred form of procurement as an outcome from the negotiation process for Project 2 is Traditional –Segregated Design & Delivery Procurement Forms
This project by its very nature needs flexibility with respect to governance / decision making related designs as well as the designer undertaking these initiatives and hence the cost reimbursements (cost-plus) sub-form if proposed (Lloyd-Walker & Walker, 2015).
6.3 Project 3: People and change
The preferred form of procurement as an outcome from the negotiation process for Project 3 is Focus on Integrated Project Teams – Emphasizing Collaboration and Coordination
The nature of this project mandates an in-house team as designed with integrated mechanism at firm level for design / delivery such that people related changes can relevantly and effectively designed and implemented. Hence, the Design & Construct (“D&C”) approach is proposed (Lloyd-Walker & Walker, 2015).
6.4 Project 4: Funding
The preferred form of procurement as an outcome from the negotiation process for Project 4 is Traditional –Segregated Design & Delivery Procurement Forms
6.4 Project 4: Funding
The preferred form of procurement as an outcome from the negotiation process for Project 4 is Traditional –Segregated Design & Delivery Procurement Forms
The nature of this project enables the possibility of bidding process for identifying the cost effective approach to determine suitable funding and hence the design bid build (“DBB”) approach is proposed (Lloyd-Walker & Walker, 2015).
7 References
Alfredson, T. and Cungu, A., 2008. Negotiation theory and practice: A review of the literature. Esaypol on line resource materials for policymaking.
KPMG. 2012. Queensland Health Review of the Queensland Health Payroll System. Retrieved from: http://www.healthpayrollinquiry.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/177902/KPMG_Report_dated_31_May_2012.PDF
Lloyd-Walker, B. and Walker, D., 2015, April. Collaborative project procurement arrangements. Project Management Institute.
Turner, J.R. and Cochrane, R.A., 1993. Goals-and-methods matrix: coping with projects with ill defined goals and/or methods of achieving them. International Journal of project management, 11(2), pp.93-102.
Give your grades a boost
Just share your requirements and get customized solutions on time.
-
1,168,768 Orders
-
4.9/5 Overall Rating
-
5,052 Experts
