Identifying the Characteristics of Contract Cheating in Project Management

This article discusses the characteristics of contract cheating in project management and how to identify them. It also explores the challenges of detecting contract cheating and the need for innovative approaches to analysis design.

Running head: CHARACTERISTICS OF CONTRACT CHEATING
Characteristics of contract cheating
Name of the student:
Name of the university:
Author Note

1CHARACTERISTICS OF CONTRACT CHEATING
“Identifying the characteristics of contract cheating in the context of project
management”
Contract cheating in a project has been complicated beyond direct detections through
technologies. Successful identification of different potential cases of contract cheating is dependent
on experience and knowledge of the students. This has also been dependent on the familiarity of
patterns and clues to recognize irregularities. Thus some knowledge of trends and hints are also
needed. Lawson et al. (2017) have helped me in understanding that again, irregularities recognized
are confirmed as examples of contract cheating in projects through conversations held between the
team members. The patterns identify a misinterpretation of information, improper references, and
irrelevant documents. The validated models from the ground stone to identify useful examples of
contract cheating in a late submission.
Contract cheating shows additional challenges in the form of integrity breach activity
provided that this has been complicated to detect. This presents institutional reactions and
insufficient to denote those forms of deliberate cheating. It is also argued that original, personalized
and sequential analysis design. Rigby et al. (2015) highlighted that articulated project management
policy fosters a culture of integrity. To address contract chanting, this has not been going enough. In
this way, I also understood that highly personalized project management tasks like portfolios or are
outsourced. Hence, according to Dawson and Sutherland-Smith (2018), a more innovative approach
towards analysis design is required. As it comes to project management integrity, there have been
assumptions that authenticity garners various engagements. This equated to a disincentive to cheat.
Here, the teams are unable to search for any data that support the outcomes. Wallace and Newton
(2014) thus show that through the relationship between authentic approaches towards analysis design
the problem of contract cheating has not been explored entirely. In this manner, the plan provides

2CHARACTERISTICS OF CONTRACT CHEATING
abundant potentials in creating learning scenario where there are fewer opportunities or reasons for
project managers to cheat. Thus I have come to know that authentic project management analysis is
used for referring to study engaging project managers in real-world scenarios of problems.
The various research questions applicable here are identified below.
 Did the submission have been answering questions to meet the criteria?
 What are the citation irregularities? (Wallace and Newton 2014)
 What languages are to be reviewed regarding language consistency and presentation?
(Lawson et al. 2017)
 What are the conversations of irregularity patterns? (Dawson and Sutherland-Smith 2018)
 What the indicators of technologies?
 How can be the irregularities about history are compared? ( Rigby et al. 2015)
 What the criteria and embedded integrity under the complete life-cycle?
As noted and recorded above, the instances of irregularities are identified. Here, the only
issue to interact with project managers has been to gain future insights. Discussing various concerns
with project managers about originality and quality means stating that there are certain irregularities
and concerns are present. This is under the presentation and submission of assessor having fears.
Moreover, explanations can be soughed out from project managers regarding why observations has
been appearing the way they do, ensuring they have the scope in expressing their point of view and
bring to highlight various other kinds of contextual factors which are not apparent while reviewing
the methods of submission.

3CHARACTERISTICS OF CONTRACT CHEATING
Bibliography:
Dawson, P. and Sutherland-Smith, W., 2018. Can markers detect contract cheating? Results from a
pilot study. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(2), pp.286-293.
Lawson, M., Edwards, J.A., Bailey, S. and Brown, V., 2017. 'Contract Cheating': an overview of
perspectives (academic, student) exploring ways to detect and alleviate contract cheating,
considering the roles of registry and technology.
Rigby, D., Burton, M., Balcombe, K., Bateman, I. and Mulatu, A., 2015. Contract cheating & the
market in essays. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 111, pp.23-37.
Wallace, M.J. and Newton, P.M., 2014. Turnaround time and market capacity in contract
cheating. Educational Studies, 40(2), pp.233-236.