Sunday, September 29, 2019

PROJECT PLAN: English Sports Council (Sport England) Places People Play (PPP) Project Plan


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This project plan proposes to evaluate the impact of the PPP projects related to the element ‘Places’ and compare them to the objectives set by Sport England.

The project duration provided is 24 months. This plan fits into the timing and leaves a slack of 2 weeks which can be used for manoeuvre whenever necessary.

The elements under evaluation are Iconic Facilities, Inspired Facilities, and Protecting Playing Fields. The focus of the evaluation shall be the suitability of design, the capacity provided by the facilities, their impact on promoting a sporting culture within the localities, and the question of sustainability.

The scope is restricted to the evaluation of the PPP project. It does not extend to the actual implementation of the project through development of facilities nor mobilising support.
This plan is subject to assumptions such as the performance of project team members according to plan, continued support from project sponsor and expatriates, and absence of barriers such as calamities that could paralyse the project.

The ultimate goal of the project is to provide information that can be put into use when forming policy or making evaluations for the improvement of the PPP projects.




1. INTRODUCTION           
1.1 PURPOSE OF PLAN   
The PPP (Places People Play) Project plan introduces the project where the same is defined and the goals and objectives provided with clarity. The project plan will provide clear guidelines of the scope and the manner in which the work will be done. It will provide the blue print for further action. More importantly, it will serve as the basis of the agreement between the parties involved including the project sponsor/owner, local partners, project management team, and other stakeholders. 
In this project plan, the following elements have been defined in detail:
-          Purpose of the project
-          The goals and objectives of the project
-          The scope of the project and expectations
-          Roles and responsibilities (project team)
-          Assumptions and constraints
-          The approach to be taken in project management
-          Ground rules applicable (if any)
-          Project budget
-          Project timeline
-          Plan summary

1.2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The project sponsor is the English Sports Council (Sport England), a body established in 1996 with the responsibility to invest National Lottery and Exchequer funding in the promotion of grassroots sports. The goal is to ensure that people excel in their chosen sport. Their focus is to create a sporting habit for life and in this regard, the organization intends to invest £1 billion between 2012 and 2017. In the pursuit of this goal, Sport England has the additional goals to: create more sporting opportunities for young people; nurture and develop talents; provide the right facilities in the right places; facilitate local funding and support local authorities; and ensure there are real opportunities for communities. One of the initiatives formed by the organization to achieve this goal is the PPP initiative.

The PPP initiative is one that is aimed at replicating the Olympic magic in the local communities. It is made up of three strands namely: Places, People, and Play.
‘Places’ caters for the development of sports facilities which can further be divided into 3: Iconic Facilities, Inspired Facilities, and Protecting Playing Fields.
‘People’ refers to initiatives aimed at spanning interest in sports among the local communities. This is to be delivered using the Sport Makers and Club Leaders projects.
‘Play’ refers to the creation of sporting opportunities and challenges that gives everyone a chance to participate. This is to be delivered using the Gold Challenge and Sportivate projects.

The project plan brief s to single out the ‘Places’ strand of PPP and evaluate its three strands: Iconic Facilities, Inspired Facilities and Protecting Playing Fields. The goal will be to base the evaluation on the stated objectives; evaluate mechanisms and processes through which the objectives are achieved or otherwise; to recommend context and manner of communication needed to support the initiatives; and to provide evidence needed for obtaining further funding.

Sport England’s summary of objectives for this project is as follows:
  • To measure the impact of Iconic Facilities, Inspired Facilities and Protecting Playing Fields against the objectives for each of the three strands
  • To find out what works to achieve these objectives, how, in what context and for whom
  • To communicate the evidence effectively to optimize its influence on policy, practice and future funding decisions

Iconic facilities have a number of features including being the most attractive in terms of design, containing the most advanced equipment, large enough to accommodate multiple sports, and sustainable in their operations. The organisation’s objectives on Iconic Facilities are as follows (Sport England, 2013):
-          Development of multi-sport facilities capable of hosting high number of participants
-          A mix of facilities that can encourage regular and sustained use by many people
-          Development of strategic facilities for more than 2 national governing bodies in sports
-          Generating strong involvement by local authorities in funding and participation
-          Creating sustainable business plan for long term sustainability of the facilities to attract investments
-          Creating quality design of the facilities
-          Creating an operating model that emphasises on the community ownership of the facilities

The inspired facilities element is focused on refurbishing old and dilapidated sports facilities or converting existing buildings into sports venues that are accessible to the whole community. Some of the areas for evaluation include review of design, modernisation of the buildings, outdoor sports lighting, outdoor sport surfaces, and provision of sports equipment (Sport England, 2013b). Sport England targets to upgrade at least 1000 sports clubs and sports facilities.

On protecting playing fields, the goal is to generate programs that can ensure that the playing fields are maintained for the long term. The aim is to minimise the cost of maintenance of the facilities. The specific objectives are as outlined below (Sport England, 2013a):
-          Improving the condition of existing pitches
-          Creating new playing field land
-          Reclaiming disused playing fields
-          Facilitating support groups and local authorities to protect playing fields

1.3 THEORIES APPLIED
The theories that will guide the project will be as follows: Grounded theory of research, Communications theory, and Total Quality Management. The Grounded theory shall be the dominant thought embraced when conducting an evaluation of the PPP projects (Byrne, 2001). It will guide the collection of information from the local authorities and populations with no preconceptions that could negatively affect the arrival at an objective conclusion.
Communications theory shall be invoked in ensuring that there is effective and meaningful communication between the project team and the other stakeholders. It shall also be useful in guiding the internal communication processes within the organisation. Clear, concise and frequent communication shall be used to ensure that there is internal cohesion to facilitate delivery of the project (Duncan, 1973). It is closely related to organisational leadership theories which outline the critical role that leaders play in organisational success.
Also to be applied at comprehensively is the theory of Total Quality Management. The project shall focus on delivering the best quality. This shall imply the need to ensure that every function within the project management team is up to the required expectations (Lyle, 2013). The application of the concept shall also guide the need to conduct a continuous performance analysis and initiation of corrective mechanisms in situations where any lapses in quality are observed.

2. PROJECT APPROACH
The project shall be divided into several phases; some of which will run concurrently. Effectiveness and efficiency shall be enhanced by embracing an activity based approach where similarities between the three elements under consideration shall be used to shorten the duration of the project. The activity based approach shall also be used to create synergy in evaluation for accuracy and to facilitate practicable recommendations.
The main phases (milestones) for this project shall be as follows:
Phase One: Identification of facilities for evaluation  
Phase Two: Obtaining requisite permits
Phase Three: Design of evaluation project
Phase Four: Procuring cooperation from local authorities and other stakeholders
Phase Five: Actual evaluation process
Phase Six: Recommending further actions as per evaluation results

2.1 Phase One: Identification of facilities
In this phase, the facilities that have been factored into the PPP project shall be evaluated. In this phase, information on the specific facilities shall be drawn from the Sport England. Upon identification, the facilities shall be divided into clusters corresponding to the three strands under evaluation (Iconic Facilities, Inspired Facilities and Protecting Playing Fields).
Further classification shall be based on location and community of target. These classifications shall facilitate evaluation in terms of the actual facilities as well as the impact on the local communities.

2.2 Phase Two: Obtaining requisite permits
The permits that will be obtained will be for the purposes of legitimising the evaluation processes. The evaluation based on the facilities will require physical inspection of the premises. Evaluation on the impact of the projects on the communities will on the other hand require an extensive survey within the locality to determine the extent to which their participation has been enhanced by the projects.

Obtaining of permits is also expected to help in facilitating the ease of obtaining information. This is especially the case with information that is regarded as classified and can only be released only for legitimate uses. The permits will also be useful for purposes of subcontracting in areas that may require additional expertise as they’d provide a basis for the formation of binding contracts.

The permits to be obtained shall therefore be related to the following fields: market survey, architectural survey, quantity surveys, field maintenance, and financial/operations audits.

2.3 Phase Three: Design of evaluation
In this stage, the specific criteria for evaluation shall be developed. The bases for the evaluation shall depend on the organisational goals regarding each of the elements under review. The tentative evaluation criteria as corresponding with the organisational goals shall be as shown below.
Evaluation element
Organisational objectives
Evaluation approach
Iconic Facilities






Development of multi-sport facilities capable of hosting high number of participants
- Gauge the number of activities that can be hosted in the venue
- Gauge the capacity of facility
A mix of facilities that can encourage regular and sustained use by many people
 - Gauge the frequency of use
- Measure rate of wear and tear
- Determine ability of facility management to conduct timely repairs
Development of strategic facilities for more than 2 national governing bodies in sports
 - Determine usability of the facilities in question
Generating strong involvement by local authorities in funding and participation
 - Gauging the proportion of funding by the local authorities
- Establishing reasons for poor performance (if so)
- Determining conditions that ought to be met for local funding to be enhanced
- Reviewing the level of participation in sports as a result of the projects
- Evaluating reasons for participation/non-participation
- Gauging the comprehensiveness of such participation
- Determining whether the levels of participation are sustainable
Creating sustainable business plan for long term sustainability of the facilities to attract investments
- Comparing incomes with expenditures to gauge financial sustainability
- Evaluating options for attracting investments for strengths and weaknesses
Creating quality design of the facilities
 - Evaluating facility design (gauging for attractiveness, effectiveness and ability to facilitate sports activities)
Creating an operating model that emphasises on the community ownership of the facilities
 - Creating an operating model that emphasises on the community ownership of the facilities
Inspired Facilities






Review of design
- Evaluating facility design (gauging for attractiveness, effectiveness and ability to facilitate sports activities)
Modernisation of the buildings
- Evaluating suitability of design
Outdoor sports lighting
- Evaluating suitability of design
Outdoor sport surfaces
- Evaluating suitability of design
Provision of sports equipment
- Evaluating suitability of design
Facilitating community access
- Gauging accessibility for sporting 
Impact on stimulating sporting activities
- Gauging the level of participation by members of the community
- local market survey to determine the impact of the PPP projects on the sporting habits
Protecting Playing Fields



Improving the condition of existing pitches
- Evaluation for suitability of pitches for use
- Evaluation based on frequency of use and maintenance
- Comparison with international standards
Creating new playing field land
- Determining the amount of space created for pitches
Reclaiming disused playing fields
- Gauging the effectiveness of reclamation efforts made
Facilitating support groups and local authorities to protect playing fields
- Gauging the level of community participation in protecting playing fields
- local market survey to determine the impact of the PPP projects on the sporting habits
- Determining ways in which improvements can be made in efforts to protect pitches

After determining the focus of the evaluation for each category, the evaluation criteria shall be established. A mixture of quantitative and qualitative elements shall be used.
The quantitative element shall be used to generate scores ranging from 1 to 10 with 1 being the lowest and 10 being the highest result attainable. This criterion shall be followed by detailed explanations about the evaluation made and the strengths/weaknesses identified.
The use of both measures shall facilitate comparison between facilities in a manner that would facilitate ease in decision making where funds to invest in a limited number of facilities are available. The project sponsor can with ease select facilities to be acted on based on their performance in the evaluation. The other stakeholders such as the local authorities can also be beneficiaries of the project as they can obtain information on their performance as compared to that of the other local authorities.

Where external stakeholders such as surveyors and architectural consultants are to be involved, a pre-evaluation training shall be done to acquaint them with the evaluation criteria. This will help ensure that the results of the evaluation project are consistent and reliable.

2.4 Phase Four: Procuring cooperation from local authorities and other stakeholders
The success of this project will depend on the level of cooperation with a number of stakeholders. The cooperation of the local authorities shall be crucial in:
-          determining sustainability levels
-          obtaining crucial information about the management of the facilities
-          understanding the characteristics of the local communities
-          getting information in the trends as far as the development of sporting habits is concerned
-          evaluation of their potential to fund the PPP projects and in what ways further support can be extended to them
-          facilitation of local market survey to determine the impact of the PPP projects on the sporting habits

This makes the local authorities very central to the success of this project. Various service providers shall also be engaged to provide expert opinion on certain aspects of the evaluations. Quantity surveyors and architectural designers shall be helpful in providing an expert opinion on the suitability and sustainability of the facilities. Where necessary, the services of research experts shall be procured to gauge the impact of the facilities in stimulating sporting habits within the localities.

2.5 Phase Five: Actual evaluation process
This phase, the evaluation process shall be according to the standards set in Phase Three above.

2.6 Phase Six: Recommending further actions as per evaluation results
Recommendations for improvement shall be based on the weaknesses observed as well as on observed good practices in areas that have been able to achieve better progress. They shall also be based on theory as relates to communication, community participation, and sports.
The recommendations shall be done systematically in line with the schedule outlined in phase 3 above.

3. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
3.1 GENERAL GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The general goals and objectives for this project shall be as follows:
  • To measure the impact of Iconic Facilities, Inspired Facilities and Protecting Playing Fields against the objectives for each of the three strands
  • To find out what works to achieve these objectives, how, in what context and for whom
  • To communicate the evidence effectively to optimize its influence on policy, practice and future funding decisions

3.2 PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
The specific goals and objectives for the project can be summarised as itemised below:
  • To evaluate the design of the facilities to gauge their suitability in terms of the range of activities and capacity
  • To determine the level of sustainability of use of the facilities
  • To evaluate the level of funding commitment by the local authorities and investors as well as their sustainability
  • The determine the level of participation by local communities
  • To gauge the attractiveness of the sporting facilities to investors in terms of revenue generation and other criteria
  • To evaluate the extent to which the PPP projects have stimulated sporting activities within their localities
  • To evaluate the suitability of use of the pitches worked on
  • To measure the amount of additional pitches created from new land or reclaimed fields
  • To gauge the robustness and sustainability of measures instituted by local authorities and support groups in protecting playing fields

4. SCOPE
4.1 SCOPE DEFINITION
The focus of this project is the evaluation of the PPP project. It singles out the ‘Places’ component of PPP and its three strands namely: Iconic Facilities, Inspired Facilities, and Protecting Playing Fields.
The evaluation project will be restricted to reviewing the objectives of Sport England as far as the three strands are concerned and using them as a basis to evaluate the effectiveness of the initiatives undertaken.

It shall also include engaging with the local communities for purposes of not only determining their level of involvement, but also for generation of insights on what needs to be done to increase effectiveness. The involvement of architectural experts and other specialists for the purposes of delivering on the evaluation goals; also falls within the scope of this project. 
After the evaluation, the project shall communicate results in a manner that can provide insights for policy making and initiation of corrective actions.

4.2 ITEMS BEYOND SCOPE
The following related aspects are beyond the scope of this project:
  • The actual development of sports facilities
  • Evaluation of the Improvement Fund
  • Actual mobilisation of local communities to engage in sports
  • Actual mobilisation of local investors to invest in the sports facilities

5. PROJECTED BUDGET
The budget for the project is estimated at £295,000. The breakdown based on the main activities is as follows:
Budget Estimate
Activity
Estimated cost(£)
General scoping of project
                   5,000.00
Identification of facilities to evaluate & initial survey
                25,000.00
Obtaining permits (fees and related expenses)
                12,000.00
Development of an evaluation approach
                10,000.00
Contacting and securing cooperation of local authorities
                10,000.00
Subcontracting architectural designers, sports experts, and others
                90,000.00
Conducting actual surveys in all localities
              123,000.00
Analysis and evaluation
                15,000.00
Final report writing and submission
                   5,000.00

              295,000.00

6. RISK ASSESSMENT     
The initial project risk assessment schedule enables the project managers to be able to identify potential areas of weaknesses and how the same can be mitigated. The aim is to ensure that the project manager is aware of impending risks and is in a position to react to them in a timely manner to ensure that the execution of the project is not interfered with.
Risk
Risk Level
L/M/H (Low, Medium, High)
Likelihood of Event
Mitigation Strategy
Project Complexity



Disruption of project schedule
H: Could be caused by lateness in execution of some sections or factors beyond the control of the project team
High
Creation of a project timeline that allows for flexibility. Measures shall be taken to ensure that some activities can be carried out simultaneouly executed at the same time. This would create reasonable flexibility to allow for disruptions.
Lack of expertise for some dimensions of the project
H: Some aspects of the project such as examination of the facilities’ design and evaluation of the potential for greater levels of activity may require more expertise than is currently available at the project team.
High
Subcontracting the work to the experts in areas of strategic disadvantage.
The process searching for the experts and confirming their availability to be confirmed before the project is accepted.
Lack of capacity at peak
H: The project will need at least 30 members at peak. This is above normal capacity by 10 people
High
Comprehensive staffing plans together with frequent meetings to pre-empt any shortages.
Effective project oversight.
Job design revision to allow room for recruiting temporary staff whenever need arises
Conflict in execution of several project activities
M: The flurry of activities while simultaneously executing different aspects of the project concurrently
Medium
Put in place effective project management controls.
Ensure that each element under review is recorded differently to avoid conclusion.
Where possible, assign different employees to different elements to lower the likelihood of misrecording.
Project Definition



Little information existing on the project
M: Knowledge that may be scarce given that this is the first evaluation to be done after the launch of the PPP project
Likely
Insights to be drawn from other studies on a prorata basis- compensating for the unique aspects of this specific project.
Likelihood of distortion of project by experts based on what they may have been accustomed to in the past.
M: Distortion could radically hamper the achievement of the project goals
Unlikely
Engagement in thourough inductions with experts and exercises conducted for them to demonstrate their understanding of the project
Diversion from the project scope
L: Risk level low since project definition is agreed upon with project owner prior to acceptance.
Unlikely
Project manager and other supervisors in the project team to review the project on a monthly basis and compare it to the initial objectives.
This will facilitate early detection and timely corrective action.  
Poor coordination with subcontracted experts hence poor deliverables
M: Likelihood can be high where negotiations are not exhaustive
Unlikely
Thorough negotiations and clear definitions to be done to ensure that deliverables by experts are well defined
Budget costs unrealistic
L: Unrealistic budgets can make execution impossible. However, the same can be minimized through intensive market research.
Unlikely
Budget estimates are revised on a regular basis in accordance with any changes in the market prices.  Besides, sufficient allowances are made in the budget to cater for any fluctuations.
Unrealistic time estimates
M: This can happen if involving segments are allocated less time than is needed.
Somewhat likely
Timelines shall be subject to monthly reviews to ensure that more demanding activities than earlier projected are allocated more time.


Lack of knowledge by project team members  
L: Core team members are already well versed with similar projects
Unlikely
Knowledge gaps to be identified by project manager and expertriates contracted and a quick course in the same offered as appropriate.
Project Leadership



Steering Committee existence
L: Identified and enthusiastic
Unlikely
Frequently seek feedback to ensure continued support
Absence of Commitment Level/Attitude of Management
L: Understands value & supports project
Unlikely 
Frequently seek feedback to ensure continued support
Absence of Commitment Level/Attitude of Users
L: Understands value & supports project
Unlikely 
Frequently seek feedback to ensure continued support
Absence of Mid-Management Commitment
L: Most understand value & support project
Unlikely
Frequently seek feedback to ensure continued support 
Project Staffing



Availability of team members on location
M: This can happen if there are disruptions in transportation arrangements
Likely
Continuous review of transportation logistics and institution of corrective mechanisms in a timely manner.
Project Management



Internal procurement procedures
L: Team already well versed with internal procurement procedures
Unlikely
N/A 
Confusion over the management structure for the new project
L: Project roles and responsibilities to be well defined
Unlikely
N/A 
Unclear quality management procedures
L: Clear definition of the same and requisite training can pre-empt this risk.
Unlikely
N/A 
Project execution  



Poor cooperation from local authorities
H: Likelihood could be high
Certainty
Extensive efforts to be made to establish contact and cooperation procured on the basis of mutuality.
Inacuracy in the recording of information
M: Variations could occur where wrong information is obtained where subjective views are collected.
Unlikely
A research methodology shall be developed that enables the project team to compensate for deficiencies in the research process.
The team shall also undergo training to know how to adopt a common approach to rating the elements in the evaluation.
Poor translation of researched content into the final report
L: Even though the risk is low, inaccurate recording could adversely affect the quality of the report hence lead to dissatisfaction.
Unlikely 
Measures shall be instituted to ensure that the researched content is analysed accurately.
The final report shall be reviewed against objectives set and passed through various quality checks and revisions to assure the quality of the final report.  

7. MILESTONES
The following are the milestones for this project:
Activity
Estimated timeline (weeks after commencement of project/ 48 weeks)
Phase 1: Identification of facilities
Completion of scoping
Week 1
Phase 2: Obtaining requisite permits
Obtaining of all the permits required
Week 3
Phase 3: Design of evaluation
Definition of all project activities
Week 3
Determination of evaluation criteria
Week 3
Identification of knowledge gaps requiring expertise
Week 3
Phase 4: Procuring cooperation of experts and local authorities
Establishment of operation approach with local authorities
Week 3
Signing of contracts with expatriates
Week 5
Phase Five: Actual evaluation process
Start of the evaluation process
Week 4
Conclusion of the evaluation process
Week 15
Phase Six: Recommending further actions as per evaluation results
Final report writing
Week 20
Submission of final report
Week 22

8. ASSUMPTIONS
8.1 PROJECT ASSUMPTIONS
The following assumptions have been made for this project:
-          The employees that constitute the project team will be able to adapt flawlessly
-          The project team management will be able to ensure that employees are on location as needed from time to time
-          That approvals and execution will be as swift as intended
-          That there shall be an initiative to further breakdown the broad responsibility areas and quality management done with caution
-          Project outcomes will be negatively affected if certain faults in the execution are not identified in time
-          The communications plan will be adhered to hence ensuring that all deviations are noted and corresponding actions taken
-          That all the major guidelines shall be adhered to
-          That the expatriates subcontracted will deliver according to expectations
-          That there will no major disruptions in the external environment that could substantially alter the project schedule

9. CONSTRAINTS
9.1 PROJECT CONSTRAINTS
The project budget is restricted to the specified amount. This means that there is little flexibility and no further research can be conducted without reverting back to the sponsor.
The project is also heavily reliant on the cooperation of the local authorities. This could prove disastrous in the unlikely event that cooperation is not procured from them.  

9.2 RELATED PROJECTS
No related projects

9.3 CRITICAL PROJECT BARRIERS
The critical project barriers are risk factors whose presence would lead to the automatic discontinuation of the project. These factors include:
-          Withdrawal of project funding: this could happen due to financial constraints or change of strategic outlook by the project sponsor.
-          Natural calamities or political instability: these factors could make it impossible to execute the project objectives.

10. PROJECT MANAGEMENT APPROACH
10.1 PROJECT TIMELINE
The activity schedule and their dependencies are as shown in the table and Gantt chart below:
Level
WBS Code
Activity description
Dependency
Estimated timeline
(in weeks)
1
1
Identification of facilities


2
1.1
Iconic facilities identification

1
2
1.2
Inspired facilities identification

1
2
1.3
Identification of protected playing fields

1
1
2
Obtaining requisite permits


2
2.1
Permits for architectural design evaluation
1.1, 1.2, 1.3
2
2
2.2
Playing fields evaluation
1.3
2
2
2.3
Financial audit
1.1, 1.2, 1.3
2
2
2.4
Market research
1.1, 1.2, 1.3

1
3
Design of evaluation process


2
3.1
Criteria for evaluating facility design
C
2
2
3.2
Criteria for evaluating capacity and range of activities
1.1, 1.2, 1.3
2
2
3.3
Criteria for evaluating for evaluating impact on society and sustainability
1.1, 1.2, 1.3
2
1
3.4
Iconic facilities


3
3.5
Evaluating suitability of facilities
3.1, 3.2, 3.3
12
3
3.6
Auditing the proportion of funding by the local authorities and related research
3.1, 3.2, 3.3
10
3
3.7
Evaluation of the impact of facility in sports participation
3.1, 3.2, 3.3
12
3
3.8
Gauging the financial viability of the projects
3.1, 3.2, 3.3
12
3
3.9
Generating an operation model for local community that is sustainable
3.1, 3.2, 3.3
12
2
4
Inspired facilities


3
4.1
Evaluating suitability of design
3.1, 3.2, 3.3
9
3
4.2
Evaluation of capacity and range of activities
3.1, 3.2, 3.3
12
3
4.3
Evaluating suitability of facilities
3.1, 3.2, 3.3
12
3
4.4
Auditing the proportion of funding by the local authorities and related research
3.1, 3.2, 3.3
12
3
4.5
Evaluation of the impact of facility in sports participation
3.1, 3.2, 3.3
12
3
4.6
Gauging the financial viability of the projects
3.1, 3.2, 3.3
12
2
5
Protecting playing fields


3
5.1
Checking pitches for suitability of use
3.1, 3.2, 3.3
12
3
5.2
Gauging sustainability of pitches
3.1, 3.2, 3.3
11
3
5.3
Determining amount of land established as new pitches
3.1, 3.2, 3.3
12
3
5.4
Determine number of worn out pitches reclaimed successfully
3.1, 3.2, 3.3
11
3
5.5
Determining ways in which the pitches can be managed sustainably
3.1, 3.2, 3.3
11
1
6
Input from experts


2
6.1
Contacting and negotiation with experts
1.1, 1.2, 1.3
2
2
6.2
Entering into binding contracts
2.1, 2.2, 2.3
2
2
6.3
Actual involvement in research
3.1, 3.2, 3.3
12
2
6.4
Report from experts
6.3
1
1
7
Involvement of local authorities


2
7.1
Agreement on approaches to research
1.1, 1.2, 1.3
3
2
7.2
Actual research/evaluation
6.1
12
1
8
Collation of information
6.4
2
1
9
Preparation of final report
8
2

The Gantt Chart for the Project is as shown below:


10.2 PROJECT ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
The project responsibilities shall be as tabulated below:
Role
Responsibilities
Participant(s)
Project Sponsor

§  The owner of the project
§  Defines the project goals
§  Reviews and approves/disproves project
§  Provides funding for the project
Sport England

Steering Committee
§  In charge of the project resources
§  Approves major funding for major aspects of the projects
Reviews project progress and generates solutions for anomalies identified
Senior Managers in the Organization
Project Manager

§  Oversees the operational aspects of the project
§  Main link between the steering committee and the project team
§  Supervises expatriates subcontracted by the organization
§  Produces timely reports to the steering committee
§  Responsible for the project budget
§  Problem resolution
Operations manager

Project Team Members
§  Execution of the project goals
§  Communicating about progress made and challenges faced in a timely manner
§  Identifying planning deficiencies and prompting quite consideration of the same
§  Actual data collection in the evaluation process
§  Coordination with expatriates during research
§  Reporting on findings
To be identified by Steering Committee

Expatriates
§  Providing professional services in their respective fields
§  To advise on various aspects of the project especially where it relates to their areas of expertise
To be identified by Steering Committee



10.3 ISSUE MANAGEMENT
There are bound to be changes in the project plan in the course of execution. As time goes, there will be new pieces of information that may make it relevant to review some plans. With each stage, there will be issues regarding the need to review timelines and review the quality of work at the time. There is also the likelihood that there will be a change in the availability of staff. This will occasion change in the project plan. However, the changes shall not be implemented in a haphazard manner. There will be a clear process whose steps shall be as shown below:
Step 1: As soon as there is a change that can impact a sensitive aspect of the project such as finances, time available to availability of employees, the project manager will be expected to make a judicious note of the same.
Step 2: The project manager will review the change documented, determine the manner in which it impacts the project, and come up with alternatives that can be implemented in reaction to the same. The recommendations shall be forwarded to the steering committee for consideration.
Step 3: Upon receipt of the recommendations by the project manager, the steering committee shall deliberate on the same and come up with a consensus decision on what is to be done next. The options available to the steering committee will be to accept, reject or modify the project manager’s proposals. Where consensus is not possible, the input of the project sponsor shall be sought through a written memorandum together with all the options under considerations.
Step 4: The project sponsor shall subsequently make a decision allowing or disallowing the change.
Step 5: Once a decision is made, the requestor of the change is notified. There is no appeal allowable as the same could culminate into further delays of the project. 

11. COMMUNICATIONS PLAN
The project shall take cognisance of the need for information by the main stakeholders of the project. There shall be deliberate efforts to ensure that communication is frequent, timely and accurate. There shall also be swift communication whenever an event that impacts the project significantly occurs. The following will be the main audiences for the project communications: Project sponsor, steering committee, project manager, expatriates, participants, project management team.

11.1 Communications methodology
Three communications methodology shall be used in the course of executing the project. These include:
Top-Down communication: This shall provide the unifying voice for the project. The organisation’s top management shall communicate frequently to ensure that the project goals are understood and that the general approach to executing the project is assimilated by all. The top managers in the project management team shall be expected to practice a hands-on approach to management as evidenced by clear and frequent communication.
Bottom-up communication: This approach to communication shall be where subordinates will be communicating to their superiors in the project management team. This communication approach shall be used to generate solutions for problems arising from time to time. Apart from its potential to lead to the generation of many creative ideas, this communication approach shall serve to numb any resistance to proposed changes as the junior members of the project team will have been consulted.

11.2 Communications outreach
Apart from the normal communications experiences in the course of executing the project goals, the following special events shall be created to facilitate communication:
Monthly Status Reports: This shall be an event through which the Project Manager shall furnish the Steering Committee with monthly reports on the progress of the projects. The specific content of the reports shall be summary of tasks completed in the month in question, list of tasks to be executed in the next month, and a summary of issues faced and resolutions proposed.
Monthly Steering Committee Meeting: This shall be a status meeting that shall be held once a month. The main aim will be to discuss the status report provided by the project manager and make decisions on any issues pointed out.
Bi-monthly Project Team Status Meeting: These will be status meetings that shall be held after every two weeks. The meeting shall be attended by all members of the project team. The aim will be to review progress. It shall also be a forum for focusing on emerging challenges and what is to be done to resolve them. The meetings shall also be used as a forum for revising the original objectives to ensure that the team members to not divert from the scope of the project.
Expatriates forum: The experts shall be expected to provide monthly briefings for the duration of their contracts. They will be providing information on progress made as well as any issues that are of interest to the project managers.



APPROVALS
SIGN-OFF SHEET
We have read the above project plan and will abide by its terms and conditions. We pledge our full commitment and support for the project plan.
Project Sponsor:                                                                                                                         
                                                                                                                              Date

Project Manager:                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                              Date


Steering Committee:                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                              Date

Steering Committee:                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                              Date

Steering Committee:                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                              Date

Steering Committee:                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                              Date

Steering Committee:                                                                                                                  
                                                                                                                              Date


Bibliography
Bo, B.N., 2005. Strategic knowledge management research: tracing the co-evolution of strategic management and knowledge management perspectives. Competitiveness Review, 15(1), pp. 1-13
Byrne, M., 2001. Grounded theory as a qualitative research methodology. Association of Operating Room Nurses. AORN Journal, 73(6), pp. 1155-1166
Duncan, W.J., 1973. Communications Theory and Problems Of Knowledge Flow In Management. The Journal of Business Communication, 11(1), p. 3
Harrington, R.J., Ottenbacher, M.C., 2011. Strategic management. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 23(4), pp. 439-462
Kelly, D., 2000. Using vision to improve organisational communication. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 21(1/2), pp. 92-101
Larsson, J., Backstrom, I., Wiklund, H., 2009. Leadership and organisational behaviour - similarities between three award-winning organisations. International Journal of Management Practice, 3(4), pp. 327-345
Lyle, M.A., 2013. Total Quality Management. Quality, 52(2), pp. 40-42
Sport England, 2013. Iconic Facilities. (Online) Available at: http://archive.sportengland.org/funding/sustainable_facilities.aspx (Accessed 22 September 2013)
Sport England, 2013a. Protecting Playing Fields. (Online) Available at: http://archive.sportengland.org/funding/protecting_playing_fields.aspx (Accessed 22 September 2013)
Sport England, 2013b. What is Inspired Facilities? (Online) Available at: http://inspiredfacilities.sportengland.org/about/what-is-inspired-facilities (Accessed 22 September 2013)
Sureshchandar, GS., Chandrasekharan, R., Anantharaman, R.N., 2002. The relationship between management's perception of total quality service and customer perceptions of service quality. Total Quality Management, 13(1), pp. 69-88




No comments:

Post a Comment

The Slaughtered and the Survivors: Collaboration Between Social Economy Organizations as a Key to Success in Times of Financial Crisis

CITATION López-Arceiz, F., Bellostas, A., & Rivera-Torres, M. (2017). The Slaughtered and the Survivors: Collaboration Between Social ...