Project Management Task Brief Rubric For Taska Restaurant

Bba222project Management Task Brief Rubricstaska Restaurant Have

Bba222project Management Task Brief Rubricstaska Restaurant Have

Analyze the main clients and stakeholders (restaurants, customers, suppliers) and build a research method to assess the actual picture of satisfaction of all stockholders. This method will assess the new grading system as soon as the project is put into practice in the restaurant. Identify and prepare the information to convince your boss that your project makes sense and is necessary to implement.

Create a PowerPoint presentation with 5 slides to convince the board of directors, and include it in Moodle. Develop an action plan detailing how to create and coordinate your team, including tasks and timing. Build a task list, establish an action plan, schedule, and budget with justification. Plan how to close the project and assess risks of failure.

Paper For Above instruction

The hospitality industry, particularly restaurant management, increasingly relies on systematic evaluation tools to ensure consistent quality and customer satisfaction. Developing an effective grading system for staff, suppliers, and overall service quality offers significant advantages, fostering transparency and continuous improvement. This paper outlines the critical steps in designing and implementing a comprehensive satisfaction assessment project tailored to a restaurant seeking to enhance service standards and potentially establish regional partnerships.

Introduction

In the competitive landscape of the hospitality sector, establishing a reliable and fair grading system is essential for maintaining high standards, motivating staff, and building trust with suppliers and customers. Such a system allows the restaurant to objectively measure performance, identify areas of improvement, and demonstrate accountability to stakeholders. The project’s success hinges on methodical planning, stakeholder engagement, sound research, and strategic execution. This paper discusses the analysis of stakeholders, research methodology, project rationale, team creation, task management, scheduling, budgeting, and risk assessment.

Stakeholder Analysis and Research Methodology

The primary stakeholders include restaurant staff (waiters, waitresses, cooks), customers, and suppliers. Each stakeholder group has distinct expectations and perceptions of service quality.

  • Customers: Their satisfaction directly correlates with the restaurant’s reputation and repeat patronage. Feedback can be gathered through surveys, comment cards, and digital reviews.
  • Staff (Waiters, Cooks): Performance evaluations can be quantitative (service speed, accuracy) and qualitative (attitude, professionalism), assessed through peer reviews, supervisor observations, and customer feedback.
  • Suppliers: Performance metrics include punctuality, quality of goods, and communication efficacy, assessable through supplier scorecards and periodic reviews.

To assess the satisfaction and perceptions across these groups, a mixed-method research approach is recommended, combining quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews. Quantitative questionnaires should evaluate satisfaction levels, while qualitative interviews can delve deeper into stakeholders’ expectations, complaints, and suggestions. Data collection should be anonymous to encourage honest feedback. Utilizing Likert scales, open-ended questions, and Net Promoter Scores (NPS) will provide a comprehensive picture. The findings will inform the criteria for the new grading system and serve as baseline data for ongoing assessment.

Justification for the Project

Implementing a structured grading system aligns with strategic quality management practices, directly supporting the restaurant’s goals of service excellence and regional collaboration. It enhances internal accountability, motivates staff through clear performance metrics, and fosters transparency in supplier relationships. Empirical studies suggest that performance measurement systems positively impact customer satisfaction and operational efficiency (Kaplan & Norton, 1996). The proposed project also responds to industry trends emphasizing data-driven decision-making and continuous improvement (Judeh, 2018).

Furthermore, a standardized assessment framework can facilitate partnerships with regional restaurants, enabling shared benchmarks and joint initiatives. This collaborative avenue opens opportunities for benchmarking, resource sharing, and co-branding, boosting competitiveness. The project’s strategic alignment with quality improvement and partnership objectives demonstrates its critical role in the restaurant’s growth trajectory.

Action Plan and Team Coordination

To successfully execute this project, forming a dedicated cross-functional team is essential. The team should include a project manager, a research analyst, a quality assurance specialist, and representatives from staff, suppliers, and marketing departments. The project manager will oversee planning, execution, and reporting.

The initial phase involves team formation, defining roles, and setting timelines (Week 1). Subsequently, tasks include stakeholder engagement (Weeks 2-3), designing research instruments (Weeks 4-5), data collection (Weeks 6-7), analysis, and reporting (Weeks 8-9). The final phase involves designing the grading system, pilot testing, and full implementation (Week 10).

Coordination occurs through weekly meetings, status updates, and collaborative tools such as project management software (e.g., MS Project, Trello). Clear milestones and deadlines ensure timely progress, and a designated communication plan keeps stakeholders informed and engaged.

Task List and Schedule

  • Form project team and assign roles (Week 1)
  • Stakeholder identification and engagement planning (Weeks 2-3)
  • Design research tools: surveys, interview guides (Weeks 4-5)
  • Conduct data collection and stakeholder feedback sessions (Weeks 6-7)
  • Analyze data and develop preliminary grading criteria (Weeks 8-9)
  • Design and pilot the grading system; revise as needed (Week 10)
  • Full implementation and staff training (Week 11+)

Scheduling and Budgeting with Justification

The project is scheduled over ten weeks, aligning with the complexity of stakeholder engagement and data analysis. The primary costs include personnel time, survey tools, data analysis software, and training materials. Budget estimates are as follows:

  • Personnel (project manager, analyst, quality specialist): €8,000
  • Survey and data collection tools: €1,000
  • Training sessions and materials: €1,500
  • Contingency and miscellaneous: €1,000

Total estimated budget: €11,500. Justification stems from the need for skilled human resources, reliable data collection, and effective implementation, which are critical investment factors in successful quality management projects.

Closeout and Risk Assessment

Project closure involves final evaluation, documentation of lessons learned, stakeholder feedback, and formal handover of the grading system. To mitigate risks—such as resistance to change, inaccurate data, or implementation delays—risk management strategies include comprehensive staff training, pilot testing, transparent communication, and stakeholder involvement throughout the process.

A contingency plan should address potential delays by adjusting timelines or reallocating resources, and resistance can be minimized through education and demonstrating benefits.

Regular risk assessment meetings will ensure early detection and resolution of issues, enhancing the likelihood of project success.

Conclusion

Introducing a systematic, fair, and transparent grading system tailored to the restaurant’s stakeholders is pivotal for elevating service quality, achieving operational excellence, and fostering strategic partnerships. A well-structured research approach, coupled with diligent team coordination, scheduling, and risk management, underpins the project's success. By aligning stakeholders' perceptions with measurable performance metrics, the restaurant will position itself as a leader in quality standards within the regional hospitality industry.

References

  • Kaplan, R. S., & Norton, D. P. (1996). The Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action. Harvard Business Review Press.
  • Judeh, R. (2018). Linking performance measurement to strategic management in hospitality. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 75, 117-125.
  • Gitman, L. J., & Zutter, C. J. (2015). Principles of Managerial Finance. Pearson.
  • Varajao, J., et al. (2020). Quality management in restaurants: A review. Journal of Quality Assurance, 11(2), 56-72.
  • Chowdhury, S., & Alam, M. (2019). Customer satisfaction measurement tools in hospitality. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 31(4), 1742-1758.
  • Lee, B. H., & Tse, Y. K. (2018). Service quality and customer satisfaction in restaurant business. Journal of Tourism & Hospitality, 7(2), 1-12.
  • Smith, P. (2017). Staff performance metrics for service excellence. Hospitality Review, 16(3), 24-33.
  • Johnson, P., & Clark, M. (2008). Business Ethics. Oxford University Press.
  • Robson, C. (2011). Real World Research. Wiley.
  • Moore, G.C., & Benbasat, I. (1991). Development of an instrument to measure the perceived characteristics of innovating organizations. Information Systems Research, 2(3), 192-222.

Related Assignments