7115IBA Managing

Complex Projects
Study Guidelines

Dr. Gustavo Guzman

 1

CONTENTS

Introduction to the Course page 2

Learning Objectives page 3

Staff details page 4

Timetable Information page 4

Seminars page 5

Map of Seminars page 6

List of Readings page 7

Assessments Summary page 11

Assessment 1 Online Quiz page 12

Assessment 2 Overall Critical Analysis page 12

Assessment 3 Final Exam page 17

Other Assessment Information page 20

A Roadmap to Success page 20

KEY DATES

ASSESMENT TASK DUE DATE WEIGHT

A1. Development of week 10 40 %
Project for Learning Sunday 14 May 23:59
(PfL)
A2. Overall critical Week 13
analysis of PfL Sunday 04 June 23:30 60 %
hrs.
 2

INTRODUCTION TO THE COURSE

Twenty first century projects are complex because goals are unclear;
stakeholders are dispersed and have multiple views; requirements are volatile
and poorly understood; and assumptions are likely to change over the duration
of the project. Therefore, solutions need to be novel, multidisciplinary and
adaptive to ever changing conditions. Taking a multidisciplinary approach, this
course provides a combination of theoretical insights and practical conceptual
tools to diagnose project complexity, and to make decision about organizing
complex projects. It is expected that at the end of the course students will be
able to understand the different dimensions of complex projects; select the most
adequate conceptual tools to deal with the type of complexity of projects; adapt
tools to specific project situation; and be aware of the implications of the
decisions made for internal stakeholders, customers, suppliers and project goals.
This course presents a set of advanced organisational and management
tools specifically developed to cope with both organisational and people-related
issues embedded in complex projects. Based on a combination of complexity,
learning & knowledge management as well as power and politics theories, this
course helps to diagnose project complexity and to make informed decisions about
the adequate tools to be applied based on the projects complexity profile.
Furthermore, it supports the development of soft project management skills
required to overcome issues linked to the actual implementation of the various
stages of the project such as, people resistance, multiple stakeholders with
competing views, unsupportive sponsors and diverse teams.
The course targets those with some responsibility for managing or
sponsoring a project as well as team project members. It is specially designed for
learners with work experience who feel the need for acquiring additional project
management skills that go beyond traditional control and planning-based methods
such as the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK).
Its aim is to present, share and promote the in-depth understanding of
advanced project management concepts as well as the development of skills for
understanding the key dimensions of complex projects and real world practices to
make the project implementation happen. This means that on completion of the
course, students should be able to critically analyse a project within a specific
context and develop alternative solutions blending technical, resource,
organisational and people related issues.
The central questions addressed by the course therefore are:

How do we recognise complex projects?

Which tools, processes and techniques are available for managing
complex projects?
Why do complex projects fail/succeed?
What are the skills and competencies required to manage complex
projects?
How can the changes resulting from new contextual conditions be
effectively managed?
 3

How do we manage unexpected events?

How do we manage politically-driven behaviour in complex projects?
How to promote learning and knowledge transfer between projects?
What is the advice of contemporary academic-based research about
practice of managing complex projects?

To be successful, a project
manager requires a diverse LEARNING OBJECTIVES
range of management, technical
skills and knowledge. While the
course focuses on Project Management, it allows students to integrate and
contribute knowledge from many of their discipline specific management areas
(both practical and theoretical).

After successfully completing this course you should be able to:

1. Explain and identify the logic behind diverse project management

models;

2. Understand the key dimensions underlying complex projects;

3. Comprehend the main features of uncertain environments and its

influence on the project;

4. Identify, discuss and evaluate the major people-related issues that

project managers need to address;

5. Compare various project management approaches;

6. Know how to apply advanced project management tools to deal with

complex projects;

7. Discuss the role of project manager as change agent;

8. Discern the political dimension of complex projects as well as

understand analytical models to cope with political behaviour;

9. Demonstrate an understanding of the relevant academic literature.

10. Translate theoretical concepts to the practice of managing complex

projects.
4
 5

STAFF DETAILS

Dr. Gustavo Guzman

Primary course convenor
Office: G42_5.25 Gold Coast campus
PH: 555 28 919
g.guzman@griffith.du.au

Please email for an appointment at my office beforehand.

I will be available to talk to students face-to-face immediately after
lectures at South Bank.
I will also be available for skype meetings, but make an appointment
via email beforehand.

TIMETABLE INFORMATION

Face-to-face seminars will be delivered on Fridays and Saturdays (9:00 hrs.-

15:30 hrs.) at South Bank in the following dates and venues:

Week 7: Friday 21 April and Saturday 22 April

Week 8: Friday 28 April and Saturday 29 April
Week 11: Friday 19 May and Saturday 20 May

Venue: S07_1.23 South Bank

 6

SEMINARS

Week & date Topic Prescribed Readings

For recommended readings
see the full List of Readings
below.

Week 0: Introduction to Complex Projects Hayes & Bennett

(2011)
Week 7 Friday 21 Module 1
April Introduction to the Course; Cicmil and Hodgson
The 4S Model: The Dynamics of (2006);
Complex Projects; Models for Atkinson et al. (2006);
Managing Complex Projects
Week 7 Sat. 22 Module 2 Buchanan (1991)
April Screening - Part A Snowden & Boone
(1997)

Week 8 Friday 28 Module 3 Shenhar & Dvir (2007)

April Screening Part B Chapter 4, 5, 6 & 7.

Week 8 Sat. 29 Module 4 Kotter (1995);

April Shifting - The Implementation of Weick & Sutclife
Complex Projects ; Managing the (2007);
Unexpected;

Week 11 Friday 19 Module 5 Buchanan & Badham

May Shaping - Power Assisted project (2008)
Management. Chapters 1 & 2.

Week 11 Friday 20 Module 6 Principe & Tell (2001);

May Sharing - Knowledge Management Rice et al. (2008);
in Complex Projects
 7

MAP OF SEMINARS

Managing Complex Projects in Uncertain

Environments
 8

LIST OF READINGS

WEEK 0 (Prescribed Reading):

Hayes, S. and Bennett, D. (2011) Managing projects with high complexity, In

T. Cooke-Davies (Ed.) Aspects of complexity: Managing projects in a
complex world, Atlanta: Project Management Institute.

MODULE 1: The Dynamics of Complex Projects

Prescribed Readings:
Cicmil, S.and Hodgson, D. (2006) Making Projects Critical: an Introduction,
In D. Hodgson and S. Cicmil (Eds.) Making Projects Critical, Basingstoke:
Palgrave. Chapter 1, pp. 1-11.
Atkinson, R., Crawford, L. and Ward, S. (2006) Fundamental uncertainties in
projects and the scope of project management, International Journal of
Project Management, 24: 687-698.
Case Analysis: The Bridge-building

Recommended Readings:
Geraldi, J., Maylor, H. and Williams, T. (2011) Now, lets make it really
complex (complicated) A systematic review of the complexities of
projects, International Journal of Operations & Production Management,
31(9): 966-990
(read pages 966-968 and 976-986).
Crawford L. & Pollack J. (2004) Hard and soft projects: a framework for
analysis, International Journal of Project Management, 22: 645-653.
Cooke-Davies, T., Cicmil, S., Crawford, L and Richardson, K. (2007) Were
not in Kansas anymore, Toto: Mapping the strange landscape of
complexity theory, and its relationship to project management, Project
Management Journal, 38(2): 50-61.

MODULE 2: Screening Part A

Prescribed Readings:
Snowden, D. and Boone, M. (2007) A leaders framework for decision
making, Harvard Business Review, November.
Buchanan D. (1991) Vulnerability and agenda: Context and process in
project management, British Journal of Management, 2:121-132.

Recommended Readings:
Boddy, D. and Paton, R. (2004) Responding to competing narratives: lessons
for project managers, International Journal of Project Management, 22:
225-233.
Funston, F. & Wagner, S. (2010) Surviving and Thriving in Uncertainty,
Hoboken, NJ, John Wiley & Sons (Chapters 3-13).
 9

Schlesinger, L., Kiefer, C. & Brown, P. (2012) New project? Dont analyze-
Act, Harvard Business Review, 90(3), March.
MODULE 3: Screening Part B
Prescribed Readings:
Shenhar, A. and Dvir, D. (2007) Reinventing Project ManagementThe
Diamond approach to successful growth and innovation, Boston: MA.,
Harvard Business School Press (Chapters 4, 5, 6, 7). [South Bank
Library Call HD69.875S52 2007. eBook is also available on-line from
the Library].
Case analysis: The perfect Thing (The iPod case)
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/14.11/ipod.html)

Recommended Readings:
Davies, A. and Hobday, M. (2005) The Business of Projects, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press (Ch 4: Systems integration and
competitive advantage). [eBook is available on-line from the Library].
Saynisch, M. (2010) Mastering Complexity and Changes in Projects,
Economy and Society via Project Management Second Order (PM-2),
Project Management Journal, 41(5): 4-20.
Prencipe, A., Davies, A. and Hobday, M. (2005) The Business of Systems
Integration, Oxford University Press (Chapter 16: Integrated solutions:
The changing business of system integration).
Sauser, B., Reily, R. & Shenkar, AS. (2009) Why projects fail? How
contingency theory can provide new insights A comparative analysis
of NASAs Mars Climate Orbiter loss, International Journal of Project
Management, 27(7), pp. 665-679.
Carlsen, A., Clegg, S. & Gjersvik, R. (2012) Idea Work Lessons of the
extraordinary in everyday creativity, Cappelen Damm, Norway
(Chapters 1 & 2).

MODULE 4: Shifting: The implementation of Complex Projects

Prescribed Readings:
Kotter J. (1995) Leading change: Why transformations efforts fail? Harvard
Business Review, 73(2), March-April: 11-20
Weick, K. and Sutcliffe (2015) Managing the Unexpected, John Wiley & Sons,
Third Edition, (Chapters 1 and 2). [eBook is available on-line from the
Library].

Recommended Readings:
 10

Fuda, P. and Badham, R. (2011) Fire, Snowball, Mask, Movie: How leaders
spark and sustain change, Harvard Business Review, November,
89(11): 145-148
Roberto, M. Bohmer, R. and Edmondson, A. (2006) Facing Ambiguous
Threats, Harvard Business Review, November.
Goodman P. & Rousseau D. (2004) Organizational change that produces
results: The Linkage approach, Academy of Management Executive,
18(3): 7-19
Strebel P. (1996) Why do employees resist change? Harvard Business
Review, May-June.
Appelbaum, S., Habashy, S., Malo, J-L. & Shafiq, H. (2012) Back to the
future: revisiting Kotters 1996 change model, Journal of Management
Development, 31(8), pp. 764-782.
De Meyer, A., Loch, C. and Pich, M. (2002) Managing Project Uncertainty:
From variation to chaos, MIT Sloan Management Review, 43(2): 60-67.
Loch, C., DeMeyer, C. and Pich, M. (2006) Managing the Unknown, New
Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Matta, N. & Ashkenas, R. (2005) Why good projects fail anyway, Harvard
Business Review, September.
Weick, K. and Sutcliffe (2015) Managing the Unexpected, John Wiley & Sons,
Third Edition, (Chapters 3-7).
Stoelsnes, R. (2007) Managing unknowns in projects, Risk Management, vol.
9, p. 271-280.
Sirkin, H., Keenan, P. & Jackson, A. (2005) The hard side of change
management, Harvard Business Review, October.

MODULE 5: Shaping: Power-assisted Project Management

Prescribed Readings:
Buchanan D. and Badham R. (2008) Power, Politics and Organizational
Change, Sage, London, Second Edition. (Chapters 1 and 2) [South
Bank Library Call HF5386.5.B83 1999].

Recommended Readings:
Pinto J. (2000) Understanding the role of politics in successful project
management, International Journal of Project management, 18: 85-91.
Marshal, N. (2006) Understanding power in project settings, In D. Hodgson
and S. Cicmil (Eds.) Making Projects Critical, Basingstoke: Palgrave.
pp. 207-231.
 11

Lovell, R. J. (1993) Power and the project manager, International Journal of

Project Management, (11) 2: 73-78
Swan J & Scarbrough H. (2005) The politics of networked innovation, Human
Relations, 58(7): 913-943.
Huczynski A. (1996) Influencing within organizations, Pearson education,
London. Chapter 8, 9, 11.

MODULE 6: Sharing: Knowledge Management in Complex Projects

Prescribed Readings:
Hansen et al. (1999) Whats is your strategy for managing knowledge?
Harvard Business Review, March-April.
Prencipe A & Tell F (2001) Inter-project learning: processes and outcomes of
knowledge codification in project-based firms, Research Policy 30:
1373-1394.

Recommended Readings:
Rice, M., OConnor, G.C. and Pierantozi, R. (2008) Implementing a learning
plan to counter project uncertainty, MIT Sloan Management Review,
49(2): 54-62.
Fernie, S., Gren, S., Weller, S. And Newcombe, R. (2003) Knowledge Sharing:
context, confusion and controversy, International Journal of Project
Management, 21: 177-187.
Wenger E. & Snyder W. (2000) Communities of practice: The organizational
frontier, Harvard Business Review, January.
Owen, J., Burstein, F. and Mitchell, S. (2004) Knowledge Reuse and Transfer
in a Project Management Environment, Journal of Information
Technology Cases and Applications, 6(4): 21-35.
Davies, A. and Hobday, M. (2005) The Business of Projects, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press (Ch 7: Learning in the project business).
Cicmil, S. (2005) Reflection, participation and learning in project
environments: a multiple perspective agenda, In Love, P., Fong, P. and
Irani, Z. (Eds.) Management of Knowledge in Project Environments,
Oxford: Elsevier Buterworth-Heinemann (p. 155-179).
Sengupta, K., Abdel-Hamid, T.K. and Van Wassenhove, L. (2008) The
Experience Trap, Harvard Business Review, February, p. 94-101.

Additional references
 12

Flyvbjerg, B., Garbuio, M. and Lovallo, D. (2009) Delusion and Deception in

Large Infrastructure Projects: Two models for explaining and preventing
executive disaster, California Management Review, 51(2): 170-192.
Davies, A., Gann, D. and
Douglas, T. (2009) ASSESSMENTS - Summary
Innovation in
Megaprojects: Systems integration at London Heathrow terminal 5,
California Management Review, 51(2): 101-125.
Miller, R. and Lessard, D. (2000) The Strategic Management of Large
Engineering Projects, Massachusetts, The MIT Press (Introduction and
Chapter 1).
Flyvbjerg, B., Bruzelius, N. and Rothengatter, W. (2003) Megaprojects and
Risk, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Chapters 1 and 12).
Apgar, D. (2006) Risk Intelligence Learning to manage what we dont
know, Harvard Business School Press, Boston, Massachusetts.

ASSESMENT TASK DUE DATE WEIGHT

A1. Development of Project Week 10 40 %
for Learning (PfL) Sunday 14 May 23:59 hrs.
-Written report 2000 Electronic submission via
words SafeAssign only
ASSESSMENT 1 Project for Learning (PfL)
60 %
A2. Overall Critical Analysis Week 13
of PfL Sunday 04 June 23:59 hrs.
- Written report 2500 Electronic submission via
words SafeAssign only

Assessment tasks are closely related. Assessment 1 (A1) involves the

conceptual/theoretical examination of your PfL. Assessment 2 (A2)
encompasses the application of tools and methods presented in this
course to critically analyse your PfL.
NOTE: Supplementary assessment is NOT available in this course.
 13

Task description

Written 2000-word report (excluding references, appendix & cover

page)
Individual assignment
7 academic references (minimum)
Due date: Sunday 14 May 23:59 hrs.
Weight: 40 %
Submission: Electronic submission via SafeAssign only

Project for Learning

This assignment (A1) requires the development of your Project for Learning
(PfL) and, the examination of concepts/theories that will be used to analyse
your PfL in A2. It has five steps.

Step 1: Student needs to define one case to develop your PfL. There are
two alternatives. Students can either select one case from cases (a)-(d)
(see below), or use your own experience and write a case related to
complex projects (Alternative 2). I advise students with little or no work
experience, to select cases (a) or (b). Note, because cases (a) and (b) are
simpler than cases (c) and (d), students who select cases (a) or (b) can
achieve a maximum mark of 70 % in A1 and A2.

Alternative 1:
a) The Concorde case,
b) The computerization of PAYE case,
c) The Deepwater case Part A (Chapters 1 & 3),
d) The Deepwater case Part B (Chapters 1 & 4),

Alternative 2: You must use your own work experience to develop a brief
account of a project with which you are familiar. You must select a
particular experience in which you were either directly or indirectly
involved. This case has to be suitable for analysis using some of the
theories/concepts presented in this course. What is important is that the
student has at least some insider information to be able to analyze PfL.
Names of people and companies must remain anonymous.

A copy of cases (a) (d) is available in the Assessment tab in

Learning@Griffith.

Step 2: You need to summarize your case. Students who selected cases
(a) and (b), need to present a 2-page summary. Students that selected
cases (c) and (d) as well as are using their own work experience (Alternative
2) to develop their case, must present a 4-page summary. Please attach
 14

this summary as an appendix of A1. I suggest focusing on the following

aspects:

Describe the main characteristics of the project in terms of

people, technology, resources and institutions involved.
What people expected from the project in terms of cost, time
and performance?
What were the real outcomes?
Was there too much difference between the expected and real
outcomes?
Who initiated the project, and why?
Who were the main stakeholders of the project?

Step 3: (i) Select one or two (max.) of the 3 models presented in Theme
1 (8-features model, Cynefin or Diamond model); (ii) explain/justify, using
academic references and your PfL, why/how the selected model(s) will
help you to analyse your PfL. Note, you do not need to apply the selected
model in A1.

Theme 1. Models for managing complex projects:

Project complexity- features and challenges
The 8-features model
The Cynefin model
The Diamond model

Theme 2. Implementation of Complex projects

Change management processes
Models of change
Managing the unexpected

Theme 3. Power assisted project management

Organisational politics & project management
Dimensions of power
Analytical tools to cope with political behaviour
Managing & influencing stakeholders

Theme 4. Knowledge Management in complex projects

KM strategies
Mechanisms to transfer knowledge in complex projects
Learning in complex projects

Step 4: You need to select one theory/concepts from themes 2-4 (see
above) that you think will help you to explain your PfL (Theme 1 will be
used in A2). Then, you need to develop a brief review of the literature. Here
you need to (i) explain and justify why the selected theories might help to
 15

understand your PfL; (ii) outline the main arguments, challenges, tensions
as well as the strengths and weaknesses of theories/concepts selected.
Remember, this section is not a simple summary of some literatures. You
need to use academic references to develop this step.

Specifications and Format

This is a 2000-word report (excluding references, appendix & cover
page).
Use Times New Roman, font 12, single space.
References: use either Harvard or APA style.
Pages must be numbered (top right).
Cover page: Indicate only Full name; Student ID number; title of PfL;
total number of words (excluding references, appendix & cover page).
Do not use Griffith University official cover page.
Executive Summary is not necessary.

Submission
procedures
A1 must be ASSESSMENT 2 Overall Critical Analysis of PfL
submitted
electronically via SafeAssign only. SafeAssign is Griffiths University
software matching text.
Electronic files must be saved in doc docx rtf or pdf formats
only.
Name your file in the following format: A1 [surname] [snumber].
Example: A1 Guzman s999999.
Electronic link for SafeAssign submission is available in the
Assessment tab of Learning@Griffith. Please note that in the
Assessment tab you will find two links:

(a) SafeAssign A1 Draft Submission . I will not mark this draft Submission;
(b) SafeAssign A1 Final Submission. You will be able to submit your Final
submission once only. I will mark this Final version only.

Task description

Written 2500-word report (excluding references, appendix & cover

page)
Individual assignment
7 academic references (minimum)
Due date: Sunday 04 June 23:59 hrs.
 16

Weight: 60 %
Submission: Electronic submission via SafeAssign only

This assignment requires the application of conceptual tools and theories

selected and explained in A1 to critically analyze your PfL. That is, students
need to develop an integrated understanding of the multiple dimensions of
the project, in order to explain the hows/whys of the projects outcomes.
Informed personal reflection (based on the application of conceptual tools
and theory) on project management processes, surrounded by specific
situations and leading to specific outcomes, constitutes the core of this
assignment. A minimum of 7 academic references is expected to be used to
substantiate your arguments. Thus, this assignment was designed to get
you thinking critically about how concepts/theories for managing complex
project are applied in diverse context-situations. It was also designed to
develop your generic skills in writing and presenting logical and persuasive
arguments. To develop this major report, you have to go through four major
components:

In the first component, Introduction, you must briefly describe your PfL,
explaining the main issues of you PfL; and describe what you will present in
the following sections. Please enclose a copy of your PfL in the Appendix.

The second component is an analysis of the type of project complexity

associated to your PfL.
Based on your selected models from Theme 1 (Step 3 in A1), you need to
apply and explain how the model(s) you have selected helps to explain
how the type of complexity associated to your PfL affected the development
of the project. You do not need to describe the selected model(s).

The third component is the application of theories/concepts (selected

from themes 2-4 and explained in Step 4 in A1), to perform an overall
analysis of your PfL. Here you need describe links between theories and
practice, explain (compare and contrast) ideas and apply them to your PfL
raising practical implications.

The fourth component is conclusions. By integrating arguments

developed in components 2 and 3, students must provide an overall critical
analysis of your PfL. Additionally, in this section you must reflect about the
strengths and limitations of tools and concepts used and their connections
with the competing contingencies that shaped your PfL.

Specifications and Format

This is a 2500-word report (excluding references, appendix & cover
page).
Use Times New Roman, font 12, single space.
 17

References: use either Harvard or APA style.

Pages must be numbered (top right).
Cover page: Indicate only Full name; Student ID number; title of PfL;
total number of words (excluding references, appendix & cover page).
Do not use Griffith University official cover page.
Executive Summary is not necessary.

Additional remarks
This assessment is not about simple application of models. It is
about explanations on how/why your PfL was a failure or a success.
The quality of your explanations is the most important aspect of this
assignment.
Your explanations need to be based on the combination of the (a)
review of the literature, (b) application of concepts and models for
managing complex projects and (c) the specific circumstances of your
PfL.
It is not necessary to provide recommendations regarding what
should be done in the project,
Failing to comply with format and/or submission procedures involves
an extra penalty of 10 % of marks.

Remarks about references

Journals presented in the List of Readings section, are high quality
academic journals. Use them.
Use of textbook need to be kept at minimum (20 % max).
Avoid building your main arguments based on references from one or
two Journals only.
Be aware of bias. e.g using technical oriented Journals only.
The requirement of 7 references includes academic Journals (80%)
and textbooks (20%). You can use other sources, but they will not
count as one of the 7 references.

Submission procedures
A2 must be submitted electronically via SafeAssign only. SafeAssign is
Griffiths University software matching text.
Electronic files must be saved in doc docx rtf or pdf formats
only.
Name your file in the following format: A2 [surname] [snumber].
Example: A2 Gomes s999999.
Electronic link for SafeAssign submission is available in the
Assessment tab of Learning@Griffith. Please note that in the
Assessment tab you will find two links:

(a) SafeAssign A2 Draft Submission . I will not mark this draft Submission;
 18

(b) SafeAssign A2 Final Submission. You will be able to submit your Final
submission once only. I will mark this Final version only.

Marking Criteria
For detailed marking criteria, see pages 17-18.
 Detailed Marking Criteria
Criteria Excellent Very Good Good Satisfactory
Unsatisfactory
Use of supporting Wide and Very good range of Appropriate range Limited range of Very limited range of
literature multidisciplinary literature used; of literature used; literature used; Use literature used; Use of
Range and quality of range of literature Consistent use of Use of high quality of few high quality too many non-
literature used; Extent to used. Used of both very high quality academic academic academic references;
which literature is classic and academic references; Selected references; Selected Use of literature that is
directly linked to the contemporary references; Selected literature linked to literature linked to little related to the
core theme of report. academic references literature directly the report core the report core report core theme;
(weight 10 %) in the specific linked to the theme in significant theme in limited does not comply with
domain of the reports core theme. extent. extent. the instructed
report. Selected minimum number of
literature directly academic references.
linked to the
reports core theme.

Theoretical & High quality choice Good choice of Fair choice of Adequate choice of Poor choice of
Conceptual of concepts & concepts & theories; concepts & theories; concepts & theories; concepts & theories;
Understanding theories; Fine Superior Adequate Few explanations No or little
Appropriate choice of explanations and explanations and explanations and and justification of explanations and
concepts & theories; justification of justification of justification of relevant justification of relevant
Explanations & relevant relevant relevant concepts/theories concepts/theories used;
definitions of relevant concepts/theories concepts/theories concepts/theories used; Weak No definition of
concepts provided if used; Full definition used; Full definition used; Reasonable definition of relevant concepts
needed; Recognition of and criticism of of relevant concepts definition of relevant concepts provided if needed; No
strengths and weaknesses relevant concepts; provided if needed; relevant concepts provided if needed; recognition of
of theories/models used; In-depth Explanation of provided if needed; Minimum strengths and
Connections between explanations of strengths and Recognition of recognition of weaknesses of
competing strengths and weaknesses of strengths and strengths and theories/models used;
theories/concepts are weaknesses of theories/models weaknesses of weaknesses of Ignorance about
established. theories/models used; Well establish theories/models theories/models connections between
(Weight 30 %) used; Full connections used; Establish used; Ignorance competing
establishment of between competing connections about connections theories/concepts used.
 connections theories/concepts between competing between competing
between competing used. theories/concepts theories/concepts
Criteria theories/concepts used. used.
used.
Very Good
Good Satisfactory Unsatisfactory
Excellent
Practical Application of Thorough Very good Fair explanations Limited Very weak
Concepts & Theories explanations explanations regarding how/why explanations explanations regarding
Development of critical regarding how/why regarding how/why concepts and regarding how/why how/why concepts and
explanations regarding concepts and concepts and theories help or do concepts and theories help or do not
how/why concepts and theories help or do theories help or do not help to explain theories help or do help to explain specific
theories help or do not not help to explain not help to explain specific situations; not help to explain situations; No
help to explain specific specific situations; specific situations; Recognition of the specific situations; recognition of the role
situations; Extent to Full and reflective Full recognition of role of embedded No recognition of of embedded
which student recognises recognition of the the role of assumptions in the the role of assumptions in the
the role of embedded role of embedded embedded concepts/model embedded concepts/model
assumptions in the assumptions in the assumptions in the applied; Some assumptions in the applied; Ignorance
concepts/model applied; concepts/model concepts/model managerial concepts/model about managerial and
Extent to which applied; applied; Most implications fully applied; Few theory implications.
managerial and theory Comprehensive managerial and explained. managerial
implications are raised discussion of theory implications implications
and discussed. managerial and explained. considered.
(weight 50 %) theory implications.
Presentation Skills Flawless written Written document Written document Written document Written document does
Report/essay structure is document, fully fully complies with complies with most barely complies not comply with
logic and clear; complying with all most formatting, formatting, with formatting, formatting, grammar,
Introduction section formatting, grammar, and word grammar, and word grammar, and word word limit
clearly describes aims, grammar, structure limit requirements. limit requirements. limit requirements; requirements. Writing
justification, methods and word limit Writing style and Writing style easy to Report structure style very difficult to
and key contextual requirements; structure are understand but with with some flaws. understand, repetitive,
issues. Writing style Writing style very adequately clear but minor repetition. Writing style a bit with few or none in-
facilitates readers direct, concise and with minor issues. References mostly difficult to text references and/or
understanding; clear. Logical Very well adequate but some understand and/or without demonstrating
Compliance with structure; Very well referenced. missing ones. Few poorly referenced. evidence. Incomplete
instructed formatting referenced. Very formatting mistakes references or with
style. (weight 10 %) clear introduction. but readable wrong format.
document.
 Other Assessment Information

Supplementary assessments: As per Griffith Business School policy,

there are no Supplementary assessments in this course.

Late Submission: An assessment item submitted after the due date,

without an approved extension from the Course Convenor, will be
penalised. The standard penalty is the reduction of the mark allocated to
the assessment item by 10% of the maximum mark applicable for the
assessment item, for each working day or part working day that the item is
late. Assessment items submitted more than five working days after the
due date are awarded zero marks.

A ROADMAP TO SUCCESS

1
Preparation for and attend all Seminars
Read preparatory materials, the information will mean much more at
the lecture.
Ask questions and participate in lectures and group discussions.
Take notes, attend a library workshop to improve your note taking
skills.

Key dates
Have a copy of Griffith University Academic calendar
Write down key dates

Prepare early for assessment items

Ask questions in class.
Make a time to meet your lecturer
Plan in advance when the development of your reports.

Preparation for written assignments

Know how to improve your academic writing referencing and
research skills.
The University offers sessions for all students.
Check out at the Library for workshops-training timetable. These
sessions are free but you must book in advance.

Get support to improve your English skills

Attend an EnglishHELP session to support your academic work

1 This section was extracted from 1001EHR GC Study Guide.

 These sessions are for all international students and students from
non-English speaking backgrounds
Sessions are free but you must book in advance. Check out
timetables at the Library.