Excellent 1 till now as per the expectation I got very Good marks so please provide this kind of solution. Awesome Job. Submitted by deadline and received great scores too. Surely recommend to all students. Undeniably the best assignment writing services. My experience was exceptional. Thanks.

here i sent the template of my assignment. read all instruction carefully and follow the instruction which is written in blue words then remove it. my research topic is: ANALYZING THE BARRIERS OF EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION IN CONTEXT OF ENGINEERING PROJECT. you have to research minimum 5 recent research articles (scholarly refereed papers) which is very closely related to my topic. then you have to use this articles in section of PRELIMINARY LITERATURE REVIEW and put the references of those articles in the reference section. there is a checklist at the starting of assignment with square sign. you have to cover those question in all different section. use Harvard referencing style. when you complete the assignment then you have to send me that word file and PDF files of those 5 research articles as well. if any query then message me. this assignment is very important for me so please make it very excellent.

Project management documentation (20%) Highly Robust, detailed, well presented and practical PM documentation with well thought off content reflecting outstanding understanding of project management practices. The PM documentation is nicely presented and completed with excellent consideration of the project issues. The PM documentation is completed with sufficient detail The PM documentation is broadly outlined, but details are not clear or accurate enough. The PM documentation is either not appropriate for the project or is poorly detailed with illogical content suggesting deficits in understanding of the scope and issues relating to next stage of research.

Research Approach, methods and ethics (20%) Research approach, data collection methods, procedures and ethical considerations are exceptionally articulated, justified and detailed. Research approach, data collection methods, procedures and ethical considerations are well argued, justified and detailed. Research approach, data collection methods, procedures and ethical considerations are explained and appropriate for the project. Research approach, data collection methods, procedures and ethical considerations are broadly outlined, but details are not always clear. Research approach, data collection methods, procedures and ethical considerations are either not appropriate for the project or are poorly articulated suggesting deficits in understanding.

Research questions & objectives (10%) Original and highly relevant research questions/hypothesis are clearly articulated. The specified RQs are well aligned with the project focus. Objectives are concisely elaborated and aligned with RQs. Clearly relevant research questions/hypothesis are determined. Objectives are well formulated. Relevant research questions/ hypothesis outlined, but could be tighter in their focus. Objectives are identified and mostly relevant to project. Research questions/ hypothesis outlined but lacking in clarity or relevance to the project. Objectives are described in broad terms only. Research questions/ hypothesis are missing, unclear or so poorly written and irrelevant to the project focus. Objectives are missing or poorly articulated.

Preliminary literature review (20%) Creative and highly organised literature review that outlines the context for the research project. Excellent overview of recent key studies relevant to the study clearly evident throughout. Well-argued and logical literature review that provides a good overview of the background and context for the research project. Overview of recent key studies quite evident throughout. Good range of literature examined throughout presentation that is mostly relevant to the project’s background and context. Cited studies are not very recent through the overview is fair. Points are supported with relevant literature, but scope of literature review is limited, as is background and context for project. Some key recent studies not referred to at all or only inferred. The quality of the literature referred to is questionable or not relevant to the project’s background or context. Few key and/or recent studies referred to.

Rationale and significance (20%) Project is original in its approach and will contribute to project management development with adequate evidence. Significance emerges logically from construction of argument in addition to being clearly articulated. Project is justified and will consolidate understanding in project management. Significance emerges from construction of argument in addition to being articulated. Project is relevant and will consolidate student’s understanding of project management. Significance does not emerge easily in argument but it is evident in addition to being outlined. Project replicates well established understanding in project management. Significance is stated but does not emerge from argument. Project is too simplistic or disorganised to offer any need or significance.

C P F The topic and abstract are relatively logical in construction and include all key information. The proposal has 3 or 4 spelling, punctuation or grammatical errors. In-text and reference list adhere to Harvard style with 3 or 4 errors. The topic and abstract have all components, but are not logical in construction. The proposal has numerous inconsistent spelling, punctuation or grammatical errors. In-text and reference list adhere to Harvard style with 5 or 6 errors. Aspects of the proposal are missing or so poorly written due to numerous spelling, punctuation or grammatical errors so meaning is unclear. In-text and reference list do not adhere to Harvard style or there are more than 7 errors.

RESEARCH IN PROJECT MANAGEMENT (PPMP20015) ASSIGNMENT 2: ASSESSMENT RUBRIC HD D Topic, Abstract, presentation and referencing (10%) The topic and abstract are logical in construction and includes all key information. The proposal has no spelling, punctuation or grammatical errors. In-text and reference list consistently adhere to Harvard style throughout. The topic and abstract are mostly logical in construction and include all key information. The proposal has 1 or 2 spelling, punctuation or grammatical errors. In-text and reference list adhere to Harvard style with 1 or 2 errors.