| Course | PJM-5300 Project Risk Management |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 5 |
| Paper type | Module 5 case study: monitoring and closure |
| Length | About 554 words, 5 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Thomas Edison State University |
| Program | M.S. in Management in Project Management |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for PJM 5300 Module 5
The Factory Visit That Fired a Trigger: Monitoring and Closing Risks on a Packaging Line
Student Name
M.S. in Management in Project Management, Thomas Edison State University
PJM-5300: Project Risk Management
Mentor Name
Month Day, Year
The Factory Visit That Fired a Trigger: Monitoring and Closing Risks on a Packaging Line
Keeping the Register Alive
The risk management plan set biweekly reviews and reviews at each phase gate. Kendrick (2015) stresses that risk management fails when the register is created at the start and then ignored; regular reviews retire risks that have passed, reassess those that remain and add new ones. The risk standard of the Project Management Institute (2019) likewise treats monitoring as continuous, with responses tracked and the register updated throughout the project.
| Review | Changes |
|---|---|
| At week 4 | R3 retired: client signed off the blister format. R6 closed: IT manager assigned to serialization integration |
| At week 8 | R1 raised from 12 to 16 after factory visit (see below) |
| At week 14 | R4 retired: air audit showed capacity sufficient. R9 closed: euro payment hedged |
| At week 20 | New risk R11 added: installation crew's cleanroom gowning qualification expiring |
| At week 26 | R2 retired: camera passed OQ tests |
A Trigger Fires
The response plan for R1, late vendor shipment, included a factory visit at week 8 with a trigger: if forming station assembly was less than 40 percent complete, the risk would be escalated. Weekly calls had reported fabrication on schedule. At the visit, our engineer found the forming station at 25 percent, because the vendor had shifted fitters to another customer's line.
The trigger fired. We escalated to the vendor's managing director the same day, invoked the contract's late-delivery clause and agreed on a recovery plan: fitters returned, and the vendor paid for air freight of two subassemblies. The delay was held to two weeks instead of an estimated five.
Using the Reserve
The two-week delay cost $28,000 in overtime and rescheduled cleanroom time, drawn from the $76,000 contingency reserve with the sponsor's approval. The camera did not fail, so its $15,000 expected value was not spent. Total contingency used was $41,000, including $13,000 for the gowning requalification, leaving $35,000 returned to the budget.
Closing the Project's Risks
The line passed performance qualification at week 33, one week inside the 34-week date agreed with the client. Closure included three risk steps.
| Step | Action |
|---|---|
| Close the register | Every risk marked retired, occurred or transferred to operations, with outcome recorded |
| Risk audit | The quality director reviewed whether the process was followed and whether responses worked |
| Lessons learned | Team session and written summary added to the company's project library |
Risk Audit Findings
Kutsch and Hall (2005) found that project managers often avoid or neglect risk management activities because of uncertainty about information and its usefulness, so audits matter for checking that the process actually ran. The audit found that reviews were held on schedule and responses were carried out, but that new risks were added late: the gowning issue should have been seen at installation planning.
Lessons for the Next Line
Three lessons went into the project library: independent factory visits, not vendor reports, are the best check on fabrication progress; validation protocols drafted during fabrication save about two weeks; and installation planning should include a review of qualifications that may expire.
Conclusion
Regular reviews, triggers with independent checks and a disciplined closure kept the project within its agreed date and returned part of the reserve. The audit and lessons learned turn this project's experience into a better start for the next one.
References
Kendrick, T. (2015). Identifying and managing project risk: Essential tools for failure-proofing your project (3rd ed.). AMACOM.
Kutsch, E., & Hall, M. (2005). Intervening conditions on the management of project risk: Dealing with uncertainty in information technology projects. International Journal of Project Management, 23(8), 591-599. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijproman.2005.06.009
Project Management Institute. (2019). The standard for risk management in portfolios, programs, and projects. Project Management Institute.
Reading the PJM 5300 Module 5 assignment instructions
The Module 5 case covers risk monitoring and closure and is the subject of this module's live session. Expect to show how a risk register is reviewed and updated during execution, how triggers and responses work when risks occur, how reserves are used and how risks are closed with an audit and lessons learned. Use a timeline of reviews, describe at least one risk that occurred and report outcomes with figures. Show how the register changed over time, describe at least one risk that occurred and report how much reserve was used and returned. Report dates, figures and outcomes for each risk you discuss.
How the PJM 5300 Module 5 example is put together
The case opens with the review cycle and a table of changes at five reviews. A section describes a trigger that fired at a factory visit and the response that limited the delay. A section reports use of the contingency reserve with figures. Closure is set out in a table, and sections report the risk audit's findings, with research on why risk processes are neglected, and three lessons for the next project. The account of reserve use shows what was spent on the fabrication slip and the gowning requalification and what was returned to the budget. A table records how five reviews retired, raised or added risks over the life of the project. Three lessons are stated specifically enough to enter the company's project library.
Reading the PJM 5300 Module 5 grading rubric
Mentors grade case studies on accurate application of monitoring and closure concepts, a realistic account of risks over time, use of figures and lessons that improve future practice. Papers that show a trigger catching what routine reports missed demonstrate why monitoring needs independent checks. Reporting reserve use and return shows financial discipline. An audit that finds weaknesses, not only successes, shows honest evaluation. Lessons stated specifically enough to change the next project, such as relying on factory visits rather than vendor reports, show learning that carries forward. An audit that names a weakness, late identification of new risks, shows honest evaluation. Figures for reserve use add credibility.
PJM 5300 Module 5 help from the desk
Students lose points by describing monitoring as a list of meetings, by omitting what happened when a risk occurred or by ending without closing the register and recording lessons. Others report reserves without figures. Show how the register changed over time. Describe a triggered response and its result. Report reserve use. Close every risk and record lessons that change the next project. Record lessons specific enough to change how the next project is run. Have someone outside the team audit whether the process was followed. Close every risk with its outcome noted. A free first sample on your own PJM-5300 monitoring and closure case is available on request.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Thomas Edison State University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More PJM 5300 and M.S. in Management in Project Management sample papers
- PJM 5300 Module 1: Written Assignment: A Risk Management Plan for a Blister Packaging Line
- PJM 5300 Module 2: Case Study: Building the Risk Register for the Packaging Line
- PJM 5300 Module 3: Case Study: Three-Point Estimates and the Chance of Meeting the Start Date
- PJM 5300 Module 4: Written Assignment: Expected Monetary Value, a Decision Tree and the Contingency Reserve
- PJM 6400 Module 4: Discussion: Choosing Collaboration Tools for a Team That Never Meets
- PJM 5400 Module 2: Written Assignment: Choosing Contract Types for Meters, Installation and Integration
- PJM 5200 Module 1: Written Assignment: Controlling a Project When No One Reports to You
PJM 5300 Module 5 questions, answered
Where can I find a free PJM 5300 Module 5 sample paper?
Risk monitoring, a fired trigger and project closure for a packaging line are in the case above.
What is a risk trigger?
A warning sign or condition that indicates a risk is about to occur or has occurred, prompting the planned response.
Why review the risk register regularly?
To retire passed risks, reassess remaining ones and add new risks as the project changes.
What is a risk audit?
A review of whether the risk process was followed and whether responses worked.
How long is the PJM-5300 final project?
It runs 15 to 20 pages and applies the course's risk principles to a project of the student's choosing.