A Leadership Profile of American Project Managers.

This case study was originally prepared as part of Project Management Applications, the capstone course of the Master of Science in Project Management in the Department of Management Science at The George Washington University, by the graduating students listed

The paper rates each of the four phases using the following project management knowledge areas: Scope, Time, Cost, Quality, Human Resource, Communication, Risk, Procurement, and Integration Management. An Excellent (5) rating was provided to the project management areas where the project management team were so successful. A Very Good (4) was given for the areas in which the project management team performed very well. A Good (3) was given for the areas in which the project management team performed well. A Poor (2) was given to the areas which had just applied new procedures. A Very Poor (1) rating was given to the project management areas in which either were not achieved the needed goals or were implemented unsuccessfully. In the fifth phase “Lessons Learned” we have studied the whole project, identified the area of improvements and learned how such adjustments can be used in coming

The paper is divided into three sections, the first of which will establish a timeline of events. This project background will serve as a case study for the analysis in the following section that will be structured such that each of the previously mentioned facets will be independently analyzed and contrasted with project management principles. Finally the paper will conclude with a summary of the analysis and recommendations based on

Project Management Institute. (2000). _A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (4th ed.)._

Eichenberger, J. (1998). Project management, part III budgets for projects. AAOHN Journal, 46(5), 268-70. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/101346

This paper was prepared for Fundamentals of Project Management, Module 2 Check Your Understanding taught by Dr. Levern Eady.

In this paper, I, a student of University of Phoenix will explain and discuss project management. I will address three main points. I will first answer what is a project. Secondly, I will discuss what are the basic phases of the project lifecycle and their purpose. Finally, I will explain why it 's important for organizations to use project management to accomplish tasks.

Larson, E.W. and Gray, C.F. (2012, p. 214). Project Management: The Managerial Process, 5th Ed. McGraw-Hill Learning Solutions. Boston, MA.

Business has changed in the past 20 or so years. Products are being produced more rapidly and with the introduction of globalization competition has become more abundant. There is a need to become more customer focused but at the same time quicker to market while still reducing cost. Doing business the old way is just not cutting it anymore. Project management gives companies the ability to focus on many things at once without losing focus on their core business model. Processes become projects that have a start and finish and can be tracked and quantified

A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge. Upper Darby, PA: Project Management Institute, 1996. Print.

Kerzner, H (2013), Project management: a system approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling (11th ed.), Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Jr., Samuel J. M. Project Management in Practice, 4th Edition. John Wiley & Sons, 10/2010. VitalBook file.

While time, cost, and performance present the most tangible measures of project success, the academic literature offers more vigorous metrics for success. Baker et.al., advocate that the stakeholder perceived performance is what should be measured (Baker & Murphy, 1983). They go on to provide at least 10 factors ranging from clarity of project goals, to the capacities of the team members (including the Project Manager), and robust project management practices are followed for planning and scope control. The limitation to the work presented by Baker et.al, as Mantel et., al suggest is that it was limited to only R&D projects and may have limited implications for other type of projects (Meredith & Mantel, 2012). An alternative framework for measuring and determining project success was presented by Belassi & Tukel, who proposed that success could be determined by four groups of factors; 1: Factors related to the project; 2: Factors related to the project manager and team; Factors related to the organization; and Finally, 4: Factors related to the external environment. In this model they argue that the factor groups are interrelated and depending on the project can greatly impact the different success of each or failure of each grouping and ultimately the project (Belassi & Tukel, 1996).

The personality of the project leader is important and is critical to the project. The project leaders leadership will dictate if the project will be successful. The team has to believe in the manager and for this to happen the manager has to follow though with what they say they will do.

In order to achieve their business objective, project management and the used methodology are key factor which will be responsible for the success or failure of this project.