Project Risk and Procurement Management Kevin Kane Sem 2 2016 2017 1" Project Risk and Procurement Management Assignment 2: ! This%is%an%individual%assignment%worth%50%%of%the%module%mark.%Word%length% 3000% words%(do%not%exceed%word%limit).%%Do#not%include%References%in%the%word%count.% % Submission:** Electronically*through*Z<͛ƐKŶůŝŶĞĂŵƉƵƐďLJMarch*12th,*23:59! * Assignment Brief A" proactive" strategic" procurement" operation" can" give" the" organisation" it" represents"a"competitive"advantage"by"reducing"waste"in"the"value"chain."For"an" organisation" of" your" choice," you" are" asked" (a)" to" critically" examine" the" Procurement" function," (b)" by" considering" 2A3" areas" below" investigate" how" the" Procurement"function"can"be"improved"and"compensate"external"turbulences"in" the"markets.""" " x Procurement"Strategy" x Strategic"Sourcing"and"Outsourcing" x eAprocurement"" x Sustainable"Procurement"" x Supply"Risk"" " "Project Risk and Procurement Management Kevin Kane Sem 2 2016 2017 2" Relates*to*Learning*Outcomes:* * x Demonstrate!an!understanding!of!the!importance!of!procurement!for!global! organisations!operating!in!complex!market!environments!! * x !!!Locate,!synthesise!and!critically!evaluate!recent/current!information!from!a! wide!range!of!published!literature!in!the!area!of!Project!Risk!and! Procurement!Management!!!!!!* ** Assessment*Housekeeping:!! zŽƵ ĂƌĞ ƌĞƋƵŝƌĞĚ ƚŽ ĨŽůůŽǁ ƚŚĞ hŶŝǀĞƌƐŝƚLJ͛Ɛ ƌĞŐƵůĂƚŝŽŶƐ ƌĞŐĂƌĚŝŶŐ ƉůĂŐŝĂƌŝƐŵ ĂŶĚ citing!sources!and!references!used.!Assignments!may!not!be!submitted!late.!Marking! penalties!for!late!submission!will!follow!the!University!regulations!for!PMC!and!late! submission.!Please!note!that!there!are!changes!in!the!late!submission!process!this! year.! " This" coursework" should" follow" a" structured" approach"and" should" be" prepared" and" presented" as" a" professional" business" report." You" should" undertake" a" relevant" literature" review" that" helps" inform" your" investigation." Please" also" ensure" that" the" Harvard" Referencing" System" is" adhered" to" and" fully" complied" with." Marking Scheme " !Criteria!! Marks!! Use!of!theory!! 30" Examples!! 30"" Quality!of!argument!! 10" Reference!to!course!ideas!! 10"" Citation!and!References!! 10"" Conclusions!! 10" "Project Risk and Procurement Management Kevin Kane Sem 2 2016 2017 3" Criterion / Mark range 900100 80089 70079 60069 50059 40049 0039 Overall level (indicative ² not for grading) Standard comparable to journal publication Standard comparable to conference paper publication Distinctive work for Masters level Merit work for Masters level Acceptable for Masters Below Masters pass standard Significantly below Masters pass standard Scope Outstanding clarity of focus, includes what is important, and excludes irrelevant issues. Excellent clarity of focus, boundaries set with no significant omissions or unnecessary issues. Clear focus. Very good setting of boundaries, includes most of what is relevant. Clear scope and focus, with some omissions or unnecessary issues. Scope evident and satisfactory but with some omissions and unnecessary issues. Poorly scoped, with significant omissions and unnecessary issues. Little or no scope or focus evident. Understanding of subject matter Outstanding with critical awareness of relevance of issues. Outstanding expression of ideas. Excellent with critical awareness of relevance of issues. Excellent expression of ideas. Very good with critical awareness of relevance of issues. Outstanding expression of ideas. Good with some awareness of relevance of issues. Ideas are expressed, with some limitation. Basic with limited awareness of relevance of issues. Limited expression of ideas. Poor with little awareness of relevance of issues Little or no understanding of subject matter is demonstrated. Literature Comprehensive literature review. Evaluation and synthesis of source material to produce an outstanding contribution. Excellent independent secondary research. Sources are evaluated and synthesized to produce an excellent contribution. Very good independent secondary research. Sources are evaluated and synthesized to produce a very good contribution. Good secondary research to extend taught materials. Evidence of evaluation of sources, with some deficiencies in choice and synthesis. Limited secondary research to extend taught materials. Limited evaluation of sources, deficiencies in choice and synthesis. Little or no extension of taught materials. Poor choice and synthesis of materials. Poor use of taught materials. No synthesis. Critical analysis based on evidence Standard of critical analysis ² showing questioning of sources, understanding of bias, independence of thought Excellent standard of critical analysis ² excellence in questioning of sources, understanding of bias, independence of thought A very good standard of critical analysis. Sources are questioned appropriately, and a very good understanding of bias, showing independence of thought Critical analysis with some questioning of sources, understanding of bias, independence of thought. Analysis evident but uncritical. Sources are not always questioned, with limited independence of thought. Little or no analysis. No valid analysis. Structure of argument, leading to conclusion Well structured, compelling and persuasive argument that leads to a valuable contribution to the field of study, paving the way for future work. Argument has excellent structure and persuasiveness, leading to very significant insights and relevant future work. WellKstructured and persuasive argument Insightful conclusion draws together key issues and possible future work. Structured and fairly convincing argument leads to conclusion that summarises key issues. Argument has some structure and development towards conclusion with limitations in summary of issues. Argument is unstructured, no recognizable conclusion. No evidence of argument or conclusion.