The Learning Management System Project


When one speaks about a resource development plan, some may accidentally confuse it with fundraising. The key point, though, is that resource development scheduling is quite different. Fundraising is focused on the accomplishment itself and is concerned with simply producing incomes to preserve the strategy and project subsidized. Fundraising is classically fixated on an occasion.

Resource development planning, in contrast, is development-oriented and is concerned with the behaviors you involve your public and other investors in consciously structuring the project and agency dimensions. It is obvious that the result of this assignation would be fundraising, but, nonetheless, resource development correspondingly comprises other outcomes. For instance, creating and maintaining robust cooperative enterprises with investors in the community, developing a dynamic advisory agency, educating crew members who are dedicated to growing jobs, and forming an image for the long-standing course of the hard project work are some of the characteristic upshots of the learning management system resource development plan.

Fundamentals of the plan

It is central to outline three serious fundamental elements that are characteristic of the learning management system project (Camilleri, 2011). Firstly, the project should be bound to the promotion of methodical development. Resource development is constructed on the basis of a schematic view of a project and agency. It refers to the progress of the tutoring program in relation to the financial and managerial structure of what the company is doing.

To put it another way, the plan generates and impacts the structures the company uses to get work done and reach the objectives. Secondly, it is the skill to navigate variations and transformations in business effectively. The modifications in the social order today occur with the speed of lightning, so they request that the organization has the skill of moving rapidly and efficiently through all the changes. Suppleness and variation are the two significant characteristics of resource development planning in the case of a learning management project.

Piloting through the transformations and being supple does not only mean reformulating the company’s tutoring program in an answer to definite subsidy prospects (Aartsengel, 2013). Effectively going through the change is about forming a continuous route for the staff to succeed in its exclusive assignment, regardless of a tempestuous peripheral situation. Thirdly, it is the development of maintainable and balanced growth. Resource development is only acceptable when growth is reasonable for the company.

When a project or company raises too fast, there is a possibility to be unable to find the logic of the assignment, and regularly, with employees pushed too far, the project grieves and the program begins to fade. It may sound strange, but sometimes more money means more problems for the company. Nonetheless, direct resources should typically be the goal, but various donations can help to counterbalance the costs or expand structural efficiency. When aiming at a contributor, the company should think about what other assets they might have to propose either as an alternative or addition to monetary donations.


Human capital

It is safe to say that practically all that can go off beam in business has a human capital constituent. The key status of handling human capital risks should be in the first place on the priority list of any project manager. Regularly, risks related to human activities are given only superficial consideration up until something corrupting occurs. Regrettably, when these risks subsidize to the damage, it can be very expensive in terms of product, status, confidence, and profits.

Human capital risks are normally divided into five main areas: self-satisfaction, gross revenue, work-related deception, disastrous workplace events, inattentive employment, or retention. In the case of the learning management system, the attention of the project manager should be focused on the complacency which can be resolved by creating a philosophy that holds on to the enterprise risk management (Swart, Mann, Brown, & Price, 2014).

The manager should also be concentrating on the employment of decent staff for the project in order for the project team to be as effective as possible. In this case, background checkup would definitely help to mitigate the risk.

Information technology

IT is another type of resource that is constantly fraught with risk. There are three types of IT risks that basically threaten the learning management system project – general (such as spam, viruses, or human error), criminal (such hackers, electronic fraud, and security breach), and natural disasters (such as fire, cyclones, and floods) also present risks to IT systems, data, and infrastructure. Damage to constructions and the company’s hardware can end up in damage or deterioration of customer archives or contacts.

In order to successfully mitigate these risks, the project has to implement safety policies and measures that would assist the staff in exercising on topics such as harmless email use, pointing out procedures for shared tasks, handling deviations in IT systems, and resolving IT incidents in a professional manner. It is not probable for the project to avert or evade all IT risks and pressures at the same time. This makes business protection an indispensable portion of information technology risk management and recovery scheduling in terms of the learning management system project. The manager should frequently revise and bring the insurance up-to-date, particularly in the face of new IT risks, including the growing use of mobile devices for office events.


The first and the foremost type of risk regarding the equipment within the learning management system project is the malfunction of the equipment. In order to mitigate the risk, in this case, the project manager will have to adopt several approaches (Kendrick, 2015). The first approach is to implement consistent inspections. Generally speaking, systematically examining the equipment before each use is the unsurpassed way to certify that it won’t flop during the lifetime of the project.

Even so, the manager can lessen the risk of gear letdown in the responsive maintenance procedures by requiring appropriate solutions that should be made as soon as possible. The company should adequately appreciate the undesirable fiscal effect of equipment letdown and not wait up until equipment flops to focus on it. Another approach is called predictive maintenance. This is the process of using past data (for instance, examination outcomes) and constant testing of equipment during the use to foresee when it’s going to flop or fall below functioning standards and take remedial act beforehand. Prognostic maintenance is a trademark of a business that totally recognizes the importance of saving the equipment in ideal working condition.


For the learning management system project, it is important for the project team to assess the risk probability, but even more important is to predict it. Not all of the risks reviewed in the paper are foreseeable, but the management should strive to minimize the possibility of involving in the project people that are not a decent pick for the team in terms of IT literacy or general working attitude. The equipment that is used during the project lifetime should often be inspected, and all the staff should be properly trained and instructed in order to reach the common goal with a minimal possibility of manifestation of the risks described above.


Aartsengel, A. V. (2013). Handbook on Continuous Improvement Transformation. Berlin: Springer.

Camilleri, E. (2011). Project Success: Critical Factors and Behaviours. Farnham: Gower.

Kendrick, T. (2015). Identifying and Managing Project Risk Essential Tools for Failure-proofing Your Project. New York: McGraw-Hill Education.

Swart, J., Mann, C., Brown, S., & Price, A. (2014). Human Resource Development. New York, NY: Routledge.