| Course | BUSI 681 Advanced Project Management II (BUSI681) |
|---|---|
| Module/Week | 2 |
| Assignment | Group DB Forum 1 Part 2 |
| Paper type | Collaborative group discussion reply |
| Length | about 496 words (thread and replies). Course guide: a synthesized group reply of 450 to 600 words referencing at least 3 peer-reviewed sources and including at least 1 biblical integration, completing the forum begun with individual Part 1 threads in Module/Week 1 |
| Format | APA 7 citations and reference list |
| Points | 25 |
| School | Liberty University Online |
| Program | MBA |
| Where it sits | Module/Week 2 in Liberty's published BUSI 681 course guide; current sections can differ |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for BUSI 681 Week 2
Group Discussion Board Forum 1: Part 2 (Group Reply)
BUSI 681 Advanced Project Management II, Group Discussion Board Forum 1: Part 2 (synthesized group reply)
Thread by [Student Name]
The group, its members' projects and the threads being synthesized are composites standing in for the course's own; the textbook, Scripture and research cited are real, and the requirements follow Liberty's public course guide for BUSI 681.
Group Reply
Our four Part 1 threads each described a schedule that had to be shortened: Dana's filter upgrade, Luis's system cutover, Grace's clinic opening and Ben's product launch. Reading them together, we saw a pattern the time-cost analysis in chapter 9 does not capture. The three cuts that worked shared two features: a project manager whom the team trusted enough to accept overtime and resequencing, and a sponsor who cleared obstacles the project manager could not. The one that failed, Ben's launch, had neither; the team saw the compressed schedule as a demand handed down without explanation. Chapter 10 of Gray and Larson (2018), on being an effective project manager, helps explain why.
Gray and Larson (2018) distinguish managing, which copes with complexity, from leading, which copes with change, and they argue that project managers must build trust and exchange influence across a web of stakeholders over whom they have little formal authority. Research has been slow to recognize this. Turner and Müller (2005), reviewing the literature for the Project Management Institute, observed that studies of project success factors did not typically mention the project manager's leadership style or competence, in contrast to general management research, which treats leadership as critical to performance.
Trust is central. Dirks and Ferrin (2002) meta-analyzed four decades of research on trust in leadership, drawing on 106 independent samples, and found that direct leaders, such as supervisors, are a particularly important referent of trust. For a project team asked to work weekends to recover a schedule, the project manager is that direct leader. A crash plan is only as fast as the team's willingness to follow it.
Sponsors matter as well, and not in the same way throughout. Kloppenborg et al. (2014) studied executive sponsor behaviors across project stages and examined whether their importance varied by stage. For our projects, this suggests that a sponsor's role in a schedule cut is concentrated at specific points: authorizing overtime and resources when the decision is made and defending the revised scope when stakeholders push back.
Nehemiah offers a picture of both roles. When the wall had to be rebuilt quickly under threat, he did not simply issue orders; he went out at night to inspect the damage himself, explained the need to the people and pointed to God's favor and the king's support before asking them to build (English Standard Version Bible, 2001/2016, Nehemiah 2:11-18). The people responded, "Let us rise up and build." Trust came first, and the pace followed.
Our group recommends that any project facing a schedule cut begin with a candid explanation to the team, involve them in choosing which activities to crash, secure the sponsor's visible commitment of resources and agree in advance which scope the sponsor will protect. Ben's launch shows the cost of skipping those steps: his team met the new date on paper, but two senior developers left within a month, and the release that followed slipped by more than the time the crash had saved.
References
Dirks, K. T., & Ferrin, D. L. (2002). Trust in leadership: Meta-analytic findings and implications for research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87(4), 611-628. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.4.611
English Standard Version Bible. (2016). Crossway. (Original work published 2001)
Gray, C. F., & Larson, E. W. (2018). Project management: The managerial process (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
Kloppenborg, T. J., Tesch, D., & Manolis, C. (2014). Project success and executive sponsor behaviors: Empirical life cycle stage investigations. Project Management Journal, 45(1), 9-20. https://doi.org/10.1002/pmj.21396
Turner, J. R., & Müller, R. (2005). The project manager's leadership style as a success factor on projects: A literature review. Project Management Journal, 36(2), 49-61. https://doi.org/10.1177/875697280503600206
What the BUSI 681 Week 2 instructions ask
BUSI 681 schedules Forum 1's second half for its second module, the week of Gray and Larson's chapter 10 on being an effective project manager, one presentation, Quiz 2 and the topic submission for the project model case study. Working together, each group drafts a single 450-to-600-word response that pulls its members' Part 1 threads into a single argument, supports that argument with three or more peer-reviewed studies, brings Scripture into it and follows APA style. Twenty-five points are at stake. Because the chapter shifts from schedules to the person running them, covering leading versus managing, stakeholder relationships, influence and trust, it gives the group a fresh lens for rereading threads that were written about crashing and fast-tracking.
How this BUSI 681 Week 2 example is built
The reply opens with the pattern the group found across its four threads: the schedule cuts that worked shared a trusted project manager and an engaged sponsor, while the one that failed had neither. It then supports that observation with three studies. Turner and Müller's review notes that project success literature has often overlooked the project manager's leadership, unlike general management research. Dirks and Ferrin's meta-analysis shows that trust in direct leaders is a particularly important form of trust. Kloppenborg, Tesch and Manolis show that sponsor behaviors matter differently at different stages. The group closes with recommendations and Nehemiah's example of leading people through a compressed project.
BUSI 681 Week 2 grading rubric: where the points go
Graders look at how well the reply weaves the members' threads into one argument, how accurately it uses chapter 10 and how critically it treats its sources, and they confirm the length of 450 to 600 words, the three peer-reviewed studies, the scriptural connection and APA style. Chapter 10 concepts that earn credit include the difference between managing and leading, mapping and managing stakeholder dependencies, the exchange of influence currencies, building trust, the qualities of an effective project manager and ethics. A reply that finds a pattern across the threads, rather than summarizing each in turn, and tests it against evidence shows the substantial, thoughtful and critical interaction the instructor wants.
BUSI 681 Week 2 help: mistakes that cost points
The word "synthesized" in the guide is the key. Group replies that give each member's thread a paragraph miss the point; look across the threads for a shared pattern and build the reply around it. Connect that pattern to the new chapter, here leadership and influence, rather than repeating the previous week's content on crashing. Choose sources that address the pattern directly. Use a biblical example of leadership that fits the situation, and read it carefully. Agree early on who drafts, who finds sources and who edits, and leave time for every member to approve the final reply before the deadline. A short planning call in the first days of the week saves hours of revision later.
Related BUSI 681 sample papers
Other BUSI 681 weeks
- BUSI 681 Week 1: Forum 1: Crashing a Late Project
- BUSI 681 Week 3: Forum 2: Building a Split Team
- BUSI 681 Week 4: Forum 2 Reply: Outsourced Teams
- BUSI 681 Week 5: Forum 3: Earned Value as Warning
- BUSI 681 Week 6: Project Model Part 1: Lead Lines
- BUSI 681 Week 7: Forum 4: An Offshore Model Team
- BUSI 681 Week 8: Project Model Part 2: Lead Lines
More MBA sample papers
- BUSI 644 Week 2: Forum 1: Needs Before Training
- BUSI 645 Week 1: Forum 1: Lead, Match or Lag Pay?
- BUSI 650 Week 2: ILP Organizational Setting
- BUSI 680 Week 2: Forum 1 Group Reply: Selection
BUSI 681 Week 2 questions, answered
What is the BUSI 681 Part 2 group reply?
In every BUSI 681 forum, the members' individual Part 1 threads are followed by one group-written Part 2 reply that synthesizes them in 450 to 600 words, cites three peer-reviewed studies, engages Scripture and earns up to 25 points.
Where can I find a free BUSI 681 Week 2 sample paper?
This page shows a complete BUSI 681 Week 2 group reply that links members' schedule-shortening threads to project manager leadership, trust and sponsor behavior.
Is the project manager's leadership a project success factor?
A literature review commissioned by the Project Management Institute found that project success research had often overlooked the project manager's leadership, even though general management research treats leadership as critical.
What does an executive sponsor do for a project?
A sponsor supports the project from the organization's leadership, for example by securing resources, removing obstacles and keeping the project aligned with strategy; research suggests the most important behaviors vary by project stage.
What else is due in BUSI 681 Module/Week 2?
Quiz 2, thirty timed questions on the leadership chapter, and the topic submission for the two-part project model case study, along with chapter 10 of Gray and Larson.
Use it as a model, or ask for your own
This paper is an original model written by our desk for study. It is not a submitted student paper and not an official Liberty University document. Read it for structure and reasoning, then write your own to the instructions in your Canvas course. If you want a version built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
Ask for a custom BUSI 681 Week 2 sample · All BUSI 681 weeks · All courses