Looking for Plagiarism-Free Answers for Your US, UK, Singapore, New Zealand, and Ireland College/University Assignments?
Talk to an Expert| Category | Assessment | Subject | Management |
|---|---|---|---|
| University | BPP University | Module Title | Technology Management Project |
| Word Count | 3500 |
|---|

This module is assessed through one graded element worth 100%. You must achieve at least 50% to pass the module. For this summative assessment you will produce a 3500-word project report and a 15-minute recorded presentation that addresses a complex, real-world challenge in a technology management context that is relevant to your area of specialism/study and builds on the work you did in the Technology Management Project Proposal summative, allowing you to take the proposal to a completed project.
The following learning outcomes (LOs) will be measured:
Formative assessment
Students will be given formative feedback on their draft to support successful completion of their final summative submission
Project Report (3,500 words, 70%)
Your Technology Management Project Proposal Summative has already outlined an organisational challenge that needs to be overcome, identified options and proposed a solution. In this Assessment, you are expected to continue your work from the Technology Management Proposal Summative and produce a complete Project Report based on the context you previously defined, and produce an actionable approach for resolving the highlighted problem.
The project report is your opportunity to demonstrate that you can critically investigate a real-world technology management challenge, apply appropriate theories and frameworks, and propose evidence-based recommendations.
Your report should include the following sections:
(To be completed for both the formative and summative assessments, 400 words for the formative and 1,100 words for the summative)
LO2 - Formulate and articulate a technology project that has strategic importance in the management of an organisation
Begin your report with a brief Executive Summary. This should provide a concise, professional overview of the project for a senior management audience. Summarise the organisational problem, explain why it matters, outline the approach taken, and present the main findings and recommendations. Avoid technical jargon and ensure the summary can stand alone as a clear statement of your work.
Follow this with your Introduction and Background Here you should set the context of the organisation or industry, identify the specific problem under investigation, and explain why it is strategically important.
Clearly state the project’s aim and objectives, ensuring they are specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound. Demonstrate your understanding of the main concepts, frameworks, and processes that apply to the problem and explain how they will inform your project.
(To be completed for both the formative and summative assessments, 350 words for the formative and 1,100 words for the summative)
LO1 - Demonstrate a systematic understanding of the main concepts, frameworks and processes that need to be considered when addressing an organisational project
LO4 - Select and apply appropriate research and project management skills.
In this section, you are expected to demonstrate both a strong theoretical understanding and practical application of research and project management skills. Begin by clearly describing the research approach you adopted. Identify the types of data you used, for example, secondary data from academic journals, industry reports, or company documents, and justify why these sources were chosen.
Explain your project approach and highlight your understanding of relevant project frameworks and processes by identifying and explaining the key theoretical models that guided your project, such as innovation frameworks, change management models, or project management standards like PMBOK. Critically evaluate why these frameworks are suitable for addressing the organisational problem.
Provide evidence of how you applied project management skills to structure and manage your work. Include at least one project management artefact, such as a Gantt chart showing timelines and milestones, a stakeholder analysis matrix, or a risk register, and explain how these tools supported planning, decision-making, and risk management throughout the project.
(To be completed for the summative only in 1,300 words)
LO3 - Evaluate information from a range of sources to support critical analysis, evaluation and problem solving.
Start this section by presenting your key findings and analysis. Explain what your research revealed about the organisational problem and show how you applied the frameworks and project management tools from Task 2 to interpret the data. Use evidence from your sources (e.g., industry reports, case studies) and include visuals such as charts or tables to make your analysis clear and professional.
After presenting your findings, draw together your insights to produce clear, evidence-based recommendations. These should be practical, feasible, and directly address the organisational problem identified earlier. Justify your recommendations using appropriate prioritisation techniques, such as cost–benefit analysis or impact/feasibility assessment, and make sure they align with the organisation’s strategic objectives. Critically evaluate alternative options and explain why your proposed solutions are the most appropriate.
Finally, write a short Conclusion that summarises the most important findings and
recommendations. Restate the project’s value and highlight its contribution to addressing the strategic problem. End with a clear statement of how the organisation can benefit from the work you have carried out.
The 15-minute recorded presentation is designed to test your ability to communicate complex project findings in a professional and engaging way. It should be targeted at a senior professional audience, such as an executive board.
LO2 - Formulate and articulate a technology project that has strategic importance in the management of an organisation
Your presentation should be structured in a way similar to below, which covers the key elements of your written report:
Presentation Requirements:
Referencing (5%)
Evaluate the use of the Harvard referencing method, including the accuracy, consistency, and range of sources cited throughout the work.
General guidance: The whole report should be presented professionally with no errors in spelling, grammar, and punctuation and should make good use of headings, and pages should be numbered. Visual artefacts such as tables, graphs, and diagrams should be used where appropriate. A complete reference list before the appendices, evidencing all research sources used in your work must be included. Any supplementary / additional material that may demonstrate understanding, but that is not directly related to the questions asked, may be shown in the appendices. Appendices are not included in your word count and will not count towards your marks.
| Task 1: Project Introduction and Problem Analysis (20%) |
| Guideline Assess the student’s ability to clearly explain the organisational context, define the technology-related problem, and show its strategic importance. The section should include a professional Executive Summary and SMART objectives |
| 0-39% Fail |
40-49% Marginal Fail |
50-59% Pass |
60-69% Merit |
80-100% High Distinction |
|
| LO2 - Formulate and articulate a technology project that has strategic importance in the management of an organisation | Does not explain the organisation or problem clearly. Executive Summary missing or very poor. No link to strategy. Objectives missing or unclear. No evidence used. |
Basic description of organisation and problem. Executive Summary present but unclear. Objectives weak or not SMART. Little or poor evidence. | Organisation and problem explained with some detail. Executive Summary adequate. Objectives mostly clear but not fully SMART. Some evidence used but limited. |
Good explanation of organisation and strategic problem. Executive Summary clear and professional. Objectives mostly SMART. Evidence and examples used well. | Outstanding explanation with deep insight. Executive Summary excellent and impactful. Objectives precise and SMART. Excellent use of evidence and examples. |
| Task 2: Research Approach and Methodology (20%) |
| Guideline Check how well the student explains the research approach and project management methods. They should justify why they chose these methods, show how frameworks were used, and discuss strengths and weaknesses. |
| 0-39% Fail |
40-49% Marginal Fail |
50-59% Pass |
60-69% Merit |
70-79% Distinction |
80-100% High Distinction |
|
|
LO1 - Demonstrate a systematic understanding of the main concepts, frameworks and processes that need to be considered when addressing an organisational LO4 - Select and apply appropriate research and |
No clear research approach or justification. Frameworks absent or misapplied. Data sources missing or unreliable. No project management artefacts or evidence of application. No evaluation of assumptions or limitations. |
Basic description of research approach with minimal justification. Frameworks mentioned but poorly explained. Data sources weak or not assessed for reliability. Project management tools referenced but not applied. Limited or no critical evaluation. |
Research approach explained with some justification. Frameworks identified and partly relevant. Data sources identified with basic reliability checks. At least one project management artefact included but weakly integrated. Some discussion of assumptions and limitations. |
Good justification of research approach and methodology. Frameworks relevant and applied appropriately. Data sources credible and reliability addressed. Project management tools used effectively with clear explanation of their role. Reflective discussion of assumptions and limitations. | Excellent methodology with strong justification. Frameworks critically evaluated and integrated effectively. Data sources robust and reliability thoroughly addressed. Project management artefacts well-presented and linked to planning and decision-making. Insightful evaluation of strengths and weaknesses. |
Outstanding methodology with deep critical insight. Frameworks expertly applied and justified. Data sources exemplary in credibility and reliability. Project management tools demonstrate structured, professional planning and execution. Original and thoughtful evaluation of challenges, assumptions, and solutions.. |
|
Task 3: Recommendations and Conclusion (25%) |
| Guideline Assess the student’s ability to present findings and analysis clearly, apply frameworks to interpret data, and produce evidence-based recommendations. Recommendations should be prioritised and aligned with organisational strategy. Conclusion should summarise findings and reinforce strategic value. |
| 0-39% Fail |
40-49% Marginal Fail |
50-59% Pass |
60-69% Merit |
70-79% Distinction |
80-100% High Distinction |
|
| LO3 - Evaluate information from a range of sources to support critical analysis, evaluation and problem solving. | Findings missing or unclear. No analysis or link to frameworks. Recommendations absent or irrelevant. Conclusion missing or very weak. |
Basic findings with little analysis. Minimal use of frameworks. Recommendations weak or poorly justified. Conclusion superficial. |
Findings and analysis presented with some evidence. Frameworks applied but limited depth. Recommendations relevant and partly justified. Conclusion present but lacks impact. |
Good findings and analysis supported by evidence. Frameworks applied effectively. Recommendations practical and prioritised. Conclusion summarises key points well. |
Excellent findings and critical analysis. Frameworks integrated well. Recommendations strongly justified using prioritisation techniques. Conclusion reinforces strategic value convincingly. |
Outstanding, insightful analysis with strong evidence. Frameworks expertly applied. Recommendations innovative, prioritised, and strategically aligned. Conclusion impactful and forward-looking. |
| Task 4: Recorded Presentation (30%) |
| Guideline Check how well the student presents the project to a professional audience. The presentation should be clear, structured, and engaging. Visuals should help explain ideas. Delivery should be confident and professional. |
| 0-39% Fail |
40-49% Marginal Fail |
50-59% Pass |
60-69% Merit |
70-79% Distinction |
80-100% High Distinction |
|
| LO2 - Formulate and articulate a technology project that has strategic importance in the management of an organisation. management of an organisation |
Does not explain the organisational challenge or strategic importance. Objectives missing or unclear Presentation lacks structure and clarity. No visuals or very poor quality. Delivery unprofessional or incomplete. |
Basic mention of the problem but little strategic relevance. Objectives vague. Weak structure with missing sections. |
Problem and strategic importance explained with some clarity. Objectives stated but not fully SMART. Presentation has basic structure and covers key sections. Visuals present but simple. Delivery adequate but not polished. |
Good explanation of organisational challenge and strategic importance. Objectives mostly SMART and relevant. Clear structure with logical flow. Visuals support understanding. Delivery confident and professional. |
Excellent articulation of the challenge and why it matters strategically. Objectives fully SMART and aligned with organisational goals. Strong structure and engaging visuals. Content persuasive and well-supported by evidence. Delivery polished and professional throughout. |
Outstanding explanation of the challenge with deep strategic insight. Objectives precise and highly relevant. Exceptional presentation with |
| Referencing (5%) |
| Guideline Evaluate the use of the Harvard referencing method, including the accuracy, consistency, and range of sources cited throughout the work. |
| 0-39% Fail |
40-49% Marginal Fail |
50-59% Pass |
60-69% Merit |
70-79% Distinction |
80-100% High Distinction |
|
| Inadequate or no use of referencing. Harvard method not followed. No credible sources cited, indicating a lack of academic integrity. | Basic use of referencing with frequent errors or omissions. Harvard style is attempted but inconsistently applied. Limited or poorly integrated sources. | Satisfactory use of Harvard referencing. Some inconsistencies or formatting issues may be present. Sources are relevant but may be limited in number or depth. |
Good use of Harvard referencing with only minor errors or inconsistencies. Sources are appropriate and mostly well-integrated into the text. |
Excellent application of the Harvard referencing method. All references are accurate, complete, and consistently formatted. Sources are relevant and well-integrated. | Outstanding use of the Harvard referencing method. All sources are cited accurately and consistently. Extensive use of high-quality academic journals, industry publications, and current research. |
Get expert help for your Technology Management Project CW Assessment at BPP University with high-quality academic support designed to meet university standards. We provide Assignment Help For BPP Students with well-structured, easy-to-understand, and original content. Our experts also offer Help with management assignment, ensuring clear guidance, proper formatting, and strong academic writing. You can also explore management assignment examples written by writers for your assurance, helping you understand the correct approach before submission. Get reliable, simple, and professional support to improve your performance and achieve better grades.
Get Your Free Academic Quote
No hidden fees · Instant response · 100% confidential
Let's Book Your Work with Our Expert and Get High-Quality Content