Assignment On Statement Of Work For Phl

Running head: STATEMENT OF WORK FOR PHL
Statement of Work for PHL
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1STATEMENT OF WORK FOR PHL
Table of Contents
Introduction................................................................................................................................2
Project Scope..............................................................................................................................2
Requirements..............................................................................................................................3
Project Scheduling.....................................................................................................................6
Acceptance Criteria....................................................................................................................7
Conclusion..................................................................................................................................9
Reference..................................................................................................................................10

2STATEMENT OF WORK FOR PHL
Introduction
Statement of work can be defined as the business document which is increasingly
deployed in the field of project management. Most of the project specified activities are
considered in SOW in terms of the scope of the project different phases of the project and the
scheduling of each of the activities involved in the project (Mubarak 2015). There are diverse
categories of formats which are followed for the preparation of SOW.
The notable objective of this SOW is to help Pashendale Holdings Ltd (PHL) which is
one of the reputed constructions in Australia to develop an advanced website. The main idea
behind the development of this website is to enhance the business area of this commercial
establishment. Virna Pashedale is the PHL has approved this website development project
and wants the existing website to be modified with options like recent company news,
informational about additional market share (McNider and Lee 2015). As PHL is a
construction based business, an entire IT team has to be hired from outside this commercial
establishment in order to develop this advanced website.
Detailed evaluation of this project will be discussed in this SOW in terms of the role
stakeholders of this project in each phase of the project along with the time and cost required
in each phase of the project (Lindsjørn et al. 2016) . The significance of acceptance criteria
while moving from one phase of the project to another shall also be highlighted in this SOW.
Project Scope
The main opportunity of this SOW is to understand the issues which might be faced
by PHL as they do not have their IT team who could have developed the required website
with more flexibility. This project scope will be including the detailed description of diverse
phases of this website such as planning, execution, employment and training (Niazi et al.

3STATEMENT OF WORK FOR PHL
2016). There will be specific range of activities for each of the stakeholders who will be
participating in this project; each of those stakeholders must understand the exact business
needs of the website. This project will be looking forward to update the existing website
maintain by PHL over the years and new options will be there in the modified version of this
website (Kolisch et al. 2016). Each of these new options will be very much significant for
this commercial establishment to enhance their customer interaction procedures.
The new website will look forward to capture additional market share for PHL, at the
same time the new modified website must be user friendly in nature. Tailored constructions
solutions provided by PHL must be understood by the clients of this organization, at the same
time the new website must also provide feedback to the queries made by the clients. At the
same time it can be said that the stakeholders who will be deployed in this project can also be
benefitted from this project as they can understand the business perspectives of construction
related activities (Kerzner 2017). There must be two panels in this modified website, the first
panel is for the registered clients of the business who can access most of the front end criteria
of the business and the second panel is the admin panel where the owners of PHL can set the
criteria behind each of the services they provide in terms of the clients testimonials and new
designs and new concepts. Pricing strategy of PHL can also be enhanced using this modified
website.
Thus, in a way it can be said that PHL wants to enhance the customer interaction
procedure using 24X7 website support feature of the new website. Each of these scopes has
to be completed within a fixed budget as set by PHL authorities and the project must be
formally closed on Christmas Eve.

4STATEMENT OF WORK FOR PHL
Requirements
Scheduling of resources and time are the main constraints involved in this software
development project. The role of the contractor will be very much significant in this project
as he will be planning the entire project and divide the work schedules for each of the work
forces deployed in this project. All the deliverables of this project shall be approved by the
CMO of PHL Sennveasna Naveen. Her team of three members must be ensuring that scope
of this project is addressed. Contractor of this reporting must be reporting her regarding any
difficulties or challenges faced in the project. The role of CMO is most significant between
each phases of this project.
Design and planning phase: Information gathering is one of the most significant part
of this phase of the project as it has to be aligned with the discussed scope of this project.
Metrics must be established and the entire designing part of the project must be sorted
accordingly.
Planning of this project involves the role of each of the stakeholders involved in this
project which must include a detailed test plan after the completion of the enactment phase of
this project (Kellenbrink and Helber 2015. Acceptance criteria in the form of written status
update is a very much recommended in each phase of the project. The on goings and the
future activities of this project must be sorted in the weekly meetings which should be
conducted between the project contractors who will be planning the activities along with the
PHL authorities.
Implementation phase: Creation of the 24X7 support is the most significant phase of
this project. After the completion of the design phase the files has to be uploaded in the PHL
servers (Kattan et al. 2016). The entire coding part will be done in this phase of the project in

5STATEMENT OF WORK FOR PHL
terms of the changes required from the existing website. This phase must be done according
to the discussed scope of the project.
The reliability of this phase of this project has to be checked from different ends. Beta
testing procedure can be selected by the programmers of this website along with that the
contractor can also review the changes made in the website from the perspective of the future
clients of this website (Dingsøyr and Lassenius 2016). Most of the limitations of the new
website can be identified from these authentic testing procedures. Contractor of this project
must be providing training to each of the internal staffs of this organization who will be
managing the admin panel of this website. Soft skill training and orientation training can be
very much significant in the training plans.
Conversion phase: This is the final phase of this project where role of the contractor
is very much significant. After the training procedures, the contractor must provide all the
documentation along with the approved project plan to the PHL authorities who were
discussed before the start of the design phase (Davari and Demeulemeester 2019). PHL
authorities must be reviewing the changes made in the website. Each scope of this project
must be covered after the end of the enactment phase.

6STATEMENT OF WORK FOR PHL
Project Scheduling
ID Outline
Number
Task
Mode
Task Name Duration Start Finish
0 0 Preparing SOW 82 days? Mon 9/2/19 Tue 12/24/19
1 1 Planning phase 5 days Mon 9/2/19 Fri 9/6/19
2 1.1 Identification of role of
stakeholders and
project scheduling
4 days Mon 9/2/19 Thu 9/5/19
3 1.2 Understanding the
required changes
1 day Fri 9/6/19 Fri 9/6/19
4 2 Website design 18 days? Mon 9/9/19 Wed 10/2/19
5 2.1 Requirement Gathering9 days Mon 9/9/19 Thu 9/19/19
6 2.2 Creation of 24X7
support
8 days Fri 9/20/19 Tue 10/1/19
7 2.3 Get acceptance from
CMO
1 day? Wed 10/2/19 Wed 10/2/19
8 2.4 End of milestone 2 0 days Wed 10/2/19 Wed 10/2/19
9 3 Implementation phase 59 days? Thu 10/3/19 Tue 12/24/19
10 3.1 Coding part 16 days Thu 10/3/19 Thu 10/24/19
11 3.2 Testing procedures 5 days Fri 10/25/19 Thu 10/31/19
12 3.3 Compilation of testing
report
3 days Fri 11/1/19 Tue 11/5/19
13 3.4 Review the changes
required
10 days Wed 11/6/19 Tue 11/19/19
14 3.5 Implementation of the
website
8 days Wed 11/20/19 Fri 11/29/19
15 3.6 Training procedures 15 days Mon 12/2/19 Fri 12/20/19
16 3.7 Getting the approval
from CMO
1 day Mon 12/23/19 Mon 12/23/19
17 3.8 Conversion phase 1 day? Tue 12/24/19 Tue 12/24/19
18 3.8.1 Providing
documentation to
PHL authorities
1 day? Tue 12/24/19 Tue 12/24/19
19 3.8.2 Project Closure phase0 days Tue 12/24/19 Tue 12/24/19
10/ 2
12/ 24
8/25 9/8 9/22 10/6 10/20 11/3 11/17 12/1 12/15 12/29 1/12 1/26 2/9 2/23
August 1 September 1 October 1 November 1 December 1 January 1 February 1 March 1
Figure 1: Each phase of the project
(Source: Created by author using Gantt chart)
Phases Description Amount
Phase 1: Planning phase $30000
Phase 2: Defining and designing phase $145000
Phase 3 Implementation phase $60000
Phase 4 Conversion phase $30000
Table 1: Budget in each phase
(Created by the author)

7STATEMENT OF WORK FOR PHL
Acceptance Criteria
According to Abrahamsson, et al. (2017), acceptance criteria are all the set of
conditions which has to be set in such a way so that the end users of the software get the
maximum benefit from the product. Business parameters and the boundaries of projects can
be set using the acceptance criteria as discussed by the investigators of this paper. The paper
was very much useful to understand the characteristics of professional acceptance criteria
from the user centred perspective. The responsibility of the owner of the software like the
designers and developers can be understood from the acceptance criteria as well (Besikci,
nBilge and Ulusoy 2015).The paper is very much useful to understand the significance of the
product back log, user stories and the acceptance criteria. Defining the feature behaviour is
one of the most significant parts of an user story. The investigator of this paper clearly
focussed on the significance of acceptance criteria in every phase of software development.
The significance of acceptance test procedures was also highlighted by the investigators of
this paper. The paper highlighted that each stakeholder associated with any particular project
must understand the acceptance criteria in a detailed manner (Boctor and Kadri 2016). The
authorized persons can also be identified in the first place using the acceptance criteria. The
significance of acceptance criteria in SOW was also highlighted by the investigators of this
paper in an organized manner.
Each phase of this project starting from the selection of external IT team to the project
completion phase on the eve of Christmas falls understand the terms and conditions which are
set in the acceptance criteria (Brhel 2015). Acceptance criteria of this project should be
involving the entire planning of resources and the time scheduling of each of the activities
and sub tasks in this project. The enactment plan of the new website along with the training
plan also has to be included in the acceptance criteria. Each phase of this project must be
completed according to the acceptance criteria (Bruni, 2017). The significance of acceptance

8STATEMENT OF WORK FOR PHL
criteria is most in the conversion phase of this project when the contractor of this project will
send all the documents to the PHL authorities (Suchman 2016) . Authorization to accept the
work and the procedure of acceptance are the two prime aspects of acceptance criteria.
 The project contractor is directly involved to identify the external IT team for this
project and the resources must be parallel to the scope of the project. The authorized
personnel for this task are the CMO of PHL Mr. Sennveasna Naveen.
 Requirement gathering about the new website is the other significant activity in this
project where the role of the project contractor is very much significant. Cognitive
diffusion is the process of acceptance for this particular activity and the authorised
personnel for this acceptance criterion is again the CMO of PHL.
 Selection of the layout and design of the new website must be done by the external IT
team and it has to be approved by the project contractor. Both the parties can
understand and work according to the acceptance criteria using cognitive diffusion
procedure.
 The role of the contractors is also very much significant during the development part
of the website and acceptance criteria must be in parallel with the scope of the project
which is discussed in the above sections of this SOW. The external IT team and
project contractor both be aware of these criteria using cognitive diffusion method.
 The 24X7 support should be in parallel with both the needs and expectation of the
consumers as well as for the stakeholders involved in this project like contractors and
PHL authorities. Each of these stakeholders can understand the acceptance criteria
using the weekly meetings have to be conducted by the project manager.
 CMO of PHL and the project contractor must play a leading role in this project and
each one of them can understand and make any amendments using the weekly
meetings as well.

9STATEMENT OF WORK FOR PHL
 Completion of this project shall be marked by the PHL authorities after getting all the
documents from the contractor by checked each of the acceptance criteria which was
set prior to the start of this project.
Conclusion
This SOW was very much useful for each of the stakeholders working in this project
as they can understand diverse aspects of this project which are responsible for the successful
completion of the project like time scheduling and acceptance criteria. The incorporation of
each of the proposed changes will be very much significant for PHL from the business
perspective as it would help them to enhance their customer interaction procedure. The
responsibilities of each of the stakeholders can be identified from this SOW as well. Time
and financial required in each phase of the project can also be concluded from the discussions
of this SOW. The acceptance criteria after the completion of each phase of the project can
also be concluded from this detailed SOW which is made for PHL as they want to enhance
their marketing and customer service by modifying their existing website with additional
features.

10STATEMENT OF WORK FOR PHL
Reference
Abrahamsson, P., Salo, O., Ronkainen, J. and Warsta, J., 2017. Agile software development
methods: Review and analysis. arXiv preprint arXiv:1709.08439.
Besikci, U., Bilge, Ü. and Ulusoy, G., 2015. Multi-mode resource constrained multi-project
scheduling and resource portfolio problem. European Journal of Operational
Research, 240(1), pp.22-31.
Beşikci, U., Bilge, Ü. and Ulusoy, G., 2015. Multi-mode resource constrained multi-project
scheduling and resource portfolio problem. European Journal of Operational
Research, 240(1), pp.22-31.
Boctor, F.F. and Kadri, R.L., 2016. The Generalized Resource Allocation and Leveling
Problem in Project Scheduling. CIRRELT, Centre interuniversitaire de recherche sur les
réseaux d'entreprise, la logistique et le transport= Interuniversity Research Centre on
Enterprise Networks, Logistics and Transportation.
Brhel, M., Meth, H., Maedche, A. and Werder, K., 2015. Exploring principles of user-
centered agile software development: A literature review. Information and software
technology, 61, pp.163-181.
Bruni, M.E., Pugliese, L.D.P., Beraldi, P. and Guerriero, F., 2017. An adjustable robust
optimization model for the resource-constrained project scheduling problem with uncertain
activity durations. Omega, 71, pp.66-84.
Davari, M. and Demeulemeester, E., 2019. The proactive and reactive resource-constrained
project scheduling problem. Journal of Scheduling, 22(2), pp.211-237.

11STATEMENT OF WORK FOR PHL
Dingsøyr, T. and Lassenius, C., 2016. Emerging themes in agile software development:
Introduction to the special section on continuous value delivery. Information and Software
Technology, 77, pp.56-60.
Kattan, M.W., Hess, K.R., Amin, M.B., Lu, Y., Moons, K.G., Gershenwald, J.E., Gimotty,
P.A., Guinney, J.H., Halabi, S., Lazar, A.J. and Mahar, A.L., 2016. American Joint
Committee on Cancer acceptance criteria for inclusion of risk models for individualized
prognosis in the practice of precision medicine. CA: a cancer journal for clinicians, 66(5),
pp.370-374.
Kellenbrink, C. and Helber, S., 2015. Scheduling resource-constrained projects with a
flexible project structure. European Journal of Operational Research, 246(2), pp.379-391.
Kerzner, H., 2017. Project management: a systems approach to planning, scheduling, and
controlling. John Wiley & Sons.
Kolisch, R., Demeulemeester, E., Garcia, R.R., T’Kindt, V. and Węglarz, J., 2016. Editorial
“Project Management and Scheduling”.
Lindsjørn, Y., Sjøberg, D.I., Dingsøyr, T., Bergersen, G.R. and Dybå, T., 2016. Teamwork
quality and project success in software development: A survey of agile development
teams. Journal of Systems and Software, 122, pp.274-286.
McNider, R.T. and Lee, P., 2015. Statement of Work.
Mubarak, S.A., 2015. Construction project scheduling and control. John Wiley & Sons.
Niazi, M., Mahmood, S., Alshayeb, M., Riaz, M.R., Faisal, K., Cerpa, N., Khan, S.U. and
Richardson, I., 2016. Challenges of project management in global software development: A
client-vendor analysis. Information and Software Technology, 80, pp.1-19.

12STATEMENT OF WORK FOR PHL
Suchman, L., 2016. Making work visible. In The New Production of Users (pp. 143-153).
Routledge.