With reference to specificity and relevance to the specific aims of the project, it is identified that the project would be more concise with fewer objectives to focus on as the topic. Too much objectives within a project run the risk of overseeing some of the objectives leading to inaccuracies and lack of substantial conclusions (Berman, McCombs, & Boruch, 1977). Given the chance to retake the project, I would down size the current project objectives to five at most to ensure that each deliverable is achieved by focusing on specific explicit sources. However, the fact that the current project objectives are too many, the project is capable of suffering from support or evidence insufficiency. Trying to meet more than ten objectives in one project creates the risk of overlooking some while concentrating on one more than the other. Additionally, directing all the objectives into focusing into the same project is hard to achieve under normal circumstances. The practicality of a project denies the accommodation of too many tasks as these result to added finances, risks of running into various levels of challenges that have the potential to delay or hike the cost of executing the project.
With reference to page 34 of the current project document, it is evident that the compiler of the document at this certain point did not consider grammar or proofreading the document a priority. With regards to this particular page, 34, it is evident that the compiler of the document did not consider TENSE and SPELLING to be a priority when compiling the document. For example, the last sentence of page 34 state that “Staff are not allow to edit the template to their owe preference” which projects high levels of human errors in the compilation of the document. With this in mind, the project runs the risk of being irrelevant to the very target group that it aims to inform and present findings to. Given the