Marking criteria - This part will be assessed based on the tutor’s evaluation of each student in terms of their actual contribution, understanding and familiarity with the entire research project, followed research processes and key principles. It is devised to ensure you have genuinely participated in the development of the research proposal. The questions will be raised around the development of the draft detailed research proposal that must be submitted in advance. There are no marks allocated for the draft research project but it is a compulsory requirement to submit it as it will be the basis to run your group interviews. You will receive a mark of zero if the draft proposal is not submitted before conducting interviews. In order to pass this part, you must satisfactorily answer at least two questions that test your attainment of the learning outcomes of this unit.

Important Note: You must familiarise yourself with the assessment criteria of this part as it is linked with Part 2D so each group member may receive a different mark to reflect their actual performance in undertaking the group work. Assessment Criteria - The below rubric will be used for marking this part. This part will be marked simultaneously with Part 2D. This is because the group mark in Part 2C will be further reduced for each group member to reflect their actual performance based on the group evaluation via Part 2C. For example, if the group mark for Part 2C is 80% (32 out of 40) and group evaluation of a member is 60% (6 out of 10), the maximum individual mark for Part 2C will be reduced accordingly and a student will only receive 60% (24 out of 40) for Part 2C. However, no additional marks will be awarded for individuals if they receive a better mark in the individual evaluation (Part 2D) than the mark received for Part 2C.

Rationale and Significance (20%) Project is original in its approach and will contribute to project management development. Significance emerges logically from construction of argument in addition to being clearly articulated. Research Questions, Hypothesis & Objectives (10%) Original and highly relevant research questions/hypothesis are clearly articulated. The specified RQs are well align with the project focus. Objectives are concisely elaborated and aligned with RQs. Research Approach and Methods (20%) Research approach and data collection method are exceptionally articulated, justified and detailed. Details include data collection instruments, diagrams and complete ethics documentation.

Preliminary Literature Review (20%) Creative and highly organised literature review that outlines the context for the research project. Critical appraisal of the key previous research relevant to the study clearly evident throughout. Project Management (20%) Highly robust, detailed and practical PM documentation with well thought off content reflecting an outstanding understanding of project management practices. Appendices are fully provided as per requirements. Evidence is provided to demonstrate outstanding use of Asana. Presentation, structure, referencing (10%) The proposal is logical in its construction with no spelling, punctuation or grammatical errors. It includes all necessary and applicable sections. In-text and reference list consistently adhere to a single Author-date system throughout. Completed checklist is very accurate.