Authority, a testable finish line and a record of what was moved out make up this GM591 Unit 7 project charter for a cooperative's meter replacement, schedule-free by design. Searches like "gm 591 unit 7 assignment example", "gm591 unit 7 sample" and "gm591 unit 7 example" land here.
What a finished GM591 Unit 7 project charter looks like
Four pages under the cooperative's charter template, plus a one-page appendix headed 'moved to the project plan.' The purpose section ties the project to the approved business case and quotes its problem statement. The sponsor is named with the authority to cancel and to release contingency. The project manager's mandate is specific: spending within the approved 9.4 million, changes up to [$25,000] each without referral, and up to [two] line crews for [sixty] crew-days a quarter by agreement with operations. The finish line is stated as three tests: [98] percent of meters reporting daily reads for two consecutive billing cycles, the old head-end decommissioned, and billing and outage systems drawing on the new data. Assumptions, constraints and [six] high-level risks follow. The only dates are the gate reviews and a required completion before vendor support ends.
How a GM591 Unit 7 example is structured
Each section answers a question the sponsor must settle now, and nothing else. Purpose explains why the cooperative is spending the money, in two paragraphs drawn from the approved case. Authority comes early, because unclear authority is where charters most often fail later: who may spend, who may cancel, who may borrow crews, and what goes back to the sponsor. The finish line follows, written as tests an auditor could run after cutover. Deliverables are listed at a level a board member would recognize, meters, network, integration and retirement of the old system, with no breakdown beneath them. Assumptions and constraints are kept apart, since a constraint cannot be revisited and an assumption can. Risks are named without response plans. The appendix is the distinctive part: every item removed from the first draft, with the document that now holds it.
A sponsor who can cancel
The general manager is named as sponsor with two powers stated outright: releasing contingency and ending the project. A sponsor without the second power, the charter notes, cannot give a gate review any teeth.
The manager's mandate, in numbers
Spending authority within the approved budget, a per-change limit of [$25,000], and a quarterly allowance of line crew time agreed with operations. Anything beyond those limits returns to the sponsor, and the charter says so in one line.
Three tests for finished
Daily reads from [98] percent of meters for two billing cycles, the old head-end switched off, and billing and outage systems using the new data. Each test can be checked by someone who never saw the plan.
Assumptions kept apart from constraints
The vendor-support deadline is a constraint. Installer availability and member acceptance of new meters are assumptions, and the charter lists them separately so that a failed assumption triggers review rather than surprise.
What moved to the plan
The appendix lists what the first draft contained and the charter no longer does: [forty] tasks, an installation calendar by substation, and a crew roster. Each item is marked with the planning document that will hold it.
Where marks go in GM591 Unit 7
Charters written as plans are the defect GM591 instructors mark most consistently: task lists, durations and calendars that belong in a later document and bury the authorization the charter exists to give. Unclear authority is the second recurring gap, a project manager named with no stated power to spend, borrow people or decide. A sponsor who is also the project manager, or who lacks the standing to cancel, draws comment. Success criteria that cannot be tested after completion, improved metering or better member service, cost the objectives row. Many sections expect the charter to link back to the approved business case rather than restate it. Charters mixing assumptions with constraints lose clarity. Papers that show judgment about what to exclude tend to be rewarded, since restraint is the skill this deliverable tests.
Get a GM591 Unit 7 example written to your instructions
Send the approved project, or the one your prompt describes, with its business case if one exists, the sponsor's role, and what the project manager should be allowed to decide alone. The Unit 7 instructions and rubric complete it. A first charter is free and arrives within 24-48h, authorization written in and scheduling left out.
GM591 Unit 7 questions, answered
Can a charter include any dates at all?
Usually a few, at summary level: a required completion date driven by a constraint, and the dates of major decision points such as gate reviews. What does not belong is a schedule of work. If a date exists because of an external deadline, include it with its reason; if it exists because someone estimated a task's duration, it belongs in the plan.
Who should be the sponsor?
Someone who controls the budget and can end the project outright, typically a senior executive rather than the project manager or a committee. The charter should name that person by role and state both powers. A sponsor who cannot cancel leaves gate reviews without consequence, and graders often read that gap as a misunderstanding of what a charter does.
How long should a charter be?
Short. Many organizational charters run two to five pages, and course prompts often expect similar. Length usually signals planning content that crept in. Every section should answer a question the sponsor must decide now, and anything the project team will work out later can be referenced rather than written into the charter itself.