Combine the outputs of the communication plan, implementation summary, closure checklist and reflection to assemble a project implementation plan and reflection for an identified project.
Project overview
Performance descriptors
|
Marks
|
- Project identity section is complete
- Succinct and clear statement of project objectives and deliverables of a standard that can be used to run a project
|
4 - 5
|
- Project identity section lists most elements including: project name, project manager, plan owner (if applicable), beginning and completion dates of the project, list of key stakeholders and version date.
- Project objectives and deliverables stated, but not all are sufficiently clear or measurable for the purposes of developing an effective implementation plan.
|
2 - 3
|
- Project identity section is incomplete or missing
- Project objectives and deliverables are not clear or missing.
|
0 - 1
|
Communication plan matrix
Performance descriptors
|
Marks
|
- Overview section is complete
- Five (5) - six (6) appropriate communication activities are specifically identified.
- The date (or frequency ) of activity is identified.
- Someone has responsibility for each communication activity.
- The target audience is identified and appropriate.
- The media used for communications are identified and appropriate.
- Key message points are appropriate.
|
4 - 5
|
- Overview section is complete
- Three (3) - four (4) appropriate communication activities are identified
- Someone has responsibility for each communication activity.
- The target audience is identified.
- The media used for communications is identified but not always appropriate.
- Key message points are included, but not always appropriate.
|
2 - 3
|
- Overview section is incomplete or missing
- Less than three appropriate communication activities are identified.
- Responsibility for any communication activity is not clear or appropriate
- The target audience is not identified in all cases or missing.
- The media used for communications is not identified and / or not appropriate.
- The date (or frequency ) of activity is incomplete or missing
|
0 - 1
|
Implementation summary
Performance descriptors
|
Marks
|
- The task / element to be monitored is appropriate.
- A clear timeline is identified for the task activities with at least 2 ‘in progress’ measures as well as a completion date
- The identified metrics are appropriate and justified.
- Criteria and related corrective action to be undertaken is clear, and the responsibility for taking action is identified.
|
4 - 5
|
- The logic for selection of monitored activity is not explicit or appropriate
- Only a single in progress measure is appropriate and justified
- Criteria and related corrective action to be undertaken is unclear, and / or the responsibility for taking action is not identified
|
2 - 3
|
- The monitored activity has no contingency (i.e. it is not connected to another activity)
- Progress measure is not adequately incorporated or scheduled
- Criteria and related corrective action to be undertaken not included, and/ or no responsibility identified
|
0 - 1
|
Change control template
Performance descriptors
|
Marks
|
- A change control process and correctly completed document is provided.
- Clear responsibility for completion of change control process is identified.
- The implication of the required change is discussed coherently
- An appropriate authority for approval is named.
- A timetable for new completion (and monitoring) is included.
|
4 - 5
|
- Change control document completed, however process not explicit
- Responsibility for change control process is not clear or appropriate.
- Discussion of implication of the required change is provided, but not sufficiently coherent.
- Authority for approval is named, but may not be the appropriate level.
- The timetable for new completion (and monitoring) included is incomplete / incorrect.
|
2 - 3
|
- Insufficient change control document and process.
- No responsibility identified / not appropriate.
- Implication of the change not discussed / not appropriate.
- Authority for approval missing.
- Timetable or monitoring missing.
|
0 - 1
|
Project closure checklist
Performance descriptors
|
Marks
|
- Seven (7) to eight (8) sections of closure checklist completed correctly.
|
4 - 5
|
- Five (5) to six (6) sections closure checklist completed correctly.
|
2 - 3
|
- Four (4) or less sections of the closure checklist completed correctly.
|
0 - 1
|
Reflection
Performance descriptors
|
Marks
|
- The reflection describes two successes and two areas for improvement from a project.
- The reflection describes practical and appropriate changes to future behaviour or processes.
- The challenge faced by the applicant in planning (or implementing) the project is specific. Practical, appropriate and useful advice is offered.
|
4 - 5
|
- The successes and challenges are described but the future behaviour is not explicit, practical or appropriate.
- The challenge and advice identified by the applicant is generic .
|
2 - 3
|
- Fewer than two (2) success and two (2) challenges from the project are identified.
- No future behaviour is discussed or is irrelevant or impractical.
- No challenge related to planning (or implementation) or is irrelevant. Recommendation is not practical.
|
0 - 1
|
Professional presentation and formatting
Performance descriptors
|
Marks
|
- Excellent use of language.
- All information is clearly communicated.
- Appropriate for a business audience.
- Document is very well presented, with clear sections, relevant headings and consistent use of styles.
- Objective of the document is clearly stated.
- No noticeable spelling or grammatical errors.
|
4 - 5
|
- Language is understandable.
- Nearly all information is clearly communicated.
- Appropriate for a business audience.
- Document is well presented; sections are apparent and headings make sense. A few inconsistencies in document styles.
- Objective is apparent.
- Very few spelling or grammatical errors.
|
2 - 3
|
- Language lacks clarity.
- Some information missing.
- Generally appropriate / not appropriate for a business audience.
- Separate sections are apparent and/or document styles are inconsistent.
- Objective is ambiguous.
- Many spelling or grammatical errors.
|
0 - 1
|
Coherence of report
Performance descriptors
|
Marks
|
- All sections of the report are fully integrated and in no way contradict each other.
- The overall plan is complete and is comprehensive enough to guide the project.
|
4 - 5
|
- There are clear relationships between the sections of the plan.
- Some minor gaps are evident.
- The plan is complete enough to give general direction to the project.
|
2 - 3
|
- All the sections required are present; there is some linkage between the plans but significant gaps exist.
- The project will require significant additional guidance to align with its objectives and scope.
|
0 - 1
|