Complete Project Example — Meridian Office Relocation
About This Reference
This page collects all project documents for the Meridian Advisory Group Office Relocation Project, the running example used throughout the Practical Application section of this book. The documents appear in the order they would be produced: business case first, charter second, then the planning documents. Each is a realistic but simplified version of a real project document. Use them as calibration examples when building your own, not as templates to copy literally.
1. Business Case Summary
Organization: Meridian Advisory Group | Prepared by: Elena Vasquez, COO | Date: Month 0 (before project approval)
Problem Statement. Meridian Advisory Group has grown from thirty-eight to sixty employees over three years. The current downtown office was designed for forty occupants. Lease expiry falls in nine months. Renewing at current terms is possible but the landlord has indicated renewal will carry a fifteen percent premium on the current rate. Continued overcrowding has contributed to documented retention friction; two staff departures in the prior year cited workspace conditions as a contributing factor.
Options Considered.
| Option | Description | 3-Year Total Cost | Growth Capacity | Key Risk |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A — Renew in place | Renew lease at current location; no physical change | ~$310,000 (lease premium, no capital) | None; still undersized | Continued retention friction; space cannot accommodate further growth |
| B — Expand current space | Absorb adjacent unit on same floor; renovate to connect | ~$400,000 (renovation + 5-year lease commitment) | Moderate; adds ~15 desks | Adjacent unit availability uncertain; 5-year term removes flexibility |
| C — Relocate to Westfield District | Lease 80-person office 2 km away; complete move in 8 months | ~$185,000 one-time + 3-year market-rate lease | Strong; 30% additional capacity available | 8-month timeline is tight; staff disruption during move week |
Recommendation: Option C. Relocation to the Westfield District is the only option that resolves the overcrowding, positions Meridian for continued growth, and does not require a long-term commitment that constrains flexibility. The three-year comparison cost is lower than Option B. The one-time capital cost of $185,000 is offset by lease cost savings over five years versus Option A.
Key Risks: Timeline pressure if lease negotiation extends beyond month one; IT migration complexity; staff productivity impact during move week.
Decision: Option C approved. Budget ceiling: $185,000. Target completion: 8 months from charter approval. Project manager to be named within two weeks. Approved by: [CEO signature] | Presented by: Elena Vasquez, COO.
Financial Analysis
The recommendation rests on four financial calculations. Annual benefits total $78,000: $60,000 from productivity recovery (eliminating space friction and meeting room shortage) and $18,000 from lease cost avoidance versus the Option A renewal premium. The one-time investment is $185,000.
| Metric | Calculation | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Payback Period | $185,000 ÷ $78,000/year | 2.37 years (~28 months) |
| 5-Year ROI | ($78,000 × 5 − $185,000) ÷ $185,000 | 111% |
| 5-Year Net Return | $78,000 × 5 − $185,000 | $205,000 |
| NPV at 8% discount rate | Sum of discounted cash flows − investment | $126,433 |
| IRR | Discount rate where NPV = 0 | ~31% |
NPV detail (8% discount rate). Discounting each year's $78,000 benefit to its present value: Year 1 = $72,222, Year 2 = $66,872, Year 3 = $61,920, Year 4 = $57,333, Year 5 = $53,086. Total present value of benefits = $311,433. NPV = $311,433 − $185,000 = $126,433. A positive NPV confirms the investment creates value above the required 8% return threshold.
IRR note. An IRR of approximately 31% means the project generates a 31% annual return on capital. This sits well above the 8% hurdle rate, confirming the investment is financially sound even under pessimistic benefit assumptions. If annual productivity recovery fell to $40,000 instead of $60,000, annual benefit would drop to $58,000, payback would extend to 3.2 years, and NPV would fall to approximately $47,000, still positive.
2. Project Charter
| Field | Detail |
|---|---|
| Project Name | Meridian Office Relocation Project |
| Purpose | Relocate Meridian Advisory Group from the current downtown office to a right-sized space in the Westfield District before the current lease expires, without disrupting client-facing operations. |
| Sponsor | Elena Vasquez, COO |
| Project Manager | Sam Torres |
| Approved Budget | $185,000 (ceiling — no overage authority without sponsor approval) |
| Project Objectives |
1. Complete physical move to Westfield office by end of Month 8. 2. Remain within approved budget of $185,000. 3. No client-facing service disruption during the transition period. |
| High-Level Scope (In) | New office lease in Westfield District; office fit-out; IT and communications infrastructure migration; physical move of all staff and equipment; decommissioning of current office; staff communication program. |
| High-Level Scope (Out) | New personal computers or peripherals for staff; organizational restructuring; current lease renegotiation; new business software licenses unrelated to the relocation. |
| Key Milestones |
Month 1: Westfield lease signed. Month 2: IT infrastructure design approved. Month 5: Office fit-out complete. Month 7: IT systems accepted (parallel run passed). Month 8: Physical move complete; current office returned. |
| Key Assumptions | Westfield property available at quoted terms through letter of intent. Current landlord will not enforce early exit penalty. Meridian IT systems are compatible with standard commercial cabling at new location. |
| Key Constraints | Project must complete before current lease expiry. Budget ceiling $185,000. All IT work must comply with Meridian's information security policy. |
| Key Risks | Lease negotiation delay (compresses critical path). IT migration complexity (may extend timeline). Staff disruption during move week (productivity impact). |
| PM Authority | Approved to make procurement decisions up to $15,000 individually, $50,000 cumulatively without escalation. Approved to sign scope changes with no cost/schedule impact. All budget-impacting decisions require sponsor approval. |
| Sponsor Signature | Elena Vasquez, COO — [Date] |
| PM Signature | Sam Torres, PM — [Date] |
3. Scope Statement
Project: Meridian Office Relocation | Version: 1.0 | Approved by: Sam Torres (PM), Elena Vasquez (Sponsor)
In scope:
- Identification, evaluation, and lease execution for a right-sized office (minimum 80 workstations) in the Westfield District.
- Office fit-out at the new location: furniture, partitions, painting, signage, building access configuration, and kitchen/common area setup.
- IT and communications infrastructure at the new location: network cabling, hardware installation, and server migration.
- Physical move of all staff, equipment, and materials from the current office to the Westfield location.
- Decommissioning of the current office and return of the space to the landlord per the existing lease terms.
- Staff communication program covering relocation timeline, new office details, seating assignments, and move-day logistics.
Out of scope:
- Procurement of new personal computers, monitors, or peripherals for staff whose equipment is due for scheduled refresh. Those requests are handled through IT's standard procurement cycle.
- Organizational restructuring, team reseating beyond move logistics, or changes to reporting lines.
- Renegotiation of the terms of the current office lease, which remains with finance as a separate obligation outside this project.
- New business software licenses or systems not directly required by the relocation itself.
Acceptance Criteria by Deliverable:
- New office lease: Signed by both parties; reviewed by Rachel Kim as legally compliant; rental rate within budget.
- Office fit-out: Sam Torres conducts a final walkthrough against the approved fit-out checklist; all snag items resolved.
- IT infrastructure: Two-week parallel run with no critical system failures; final sign-off by Marcus Chen and department heads.
- Physical move: All staff relocated; equipment inventory confirms no items lost or damaged; first business day at new location operational.
- Old office exit: Landlord provides written confirmation of space returned in satisfactory condition; deposit returned.
4. Work Breakdown Structure
| WBS Code | Deliverable / Work Package | Owner | Budget Allocation |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1.0 | Meridian Office Relocation Project | Sam Torres | $185,000 |
| 1.1 | New Office Space | Tom Walsh | $80,000 |
| 1.1.1 | Site selected; letter of intent signed | Priya Kapoor | Included in 1.1.2 |
| 1.1.2 | Lease negotiated, reviewed by legal, and signed | Rachel Kim | $12,000 |
| 1.1.3 | Office fit-out complete and accepted | Tom Walsh | $68,000 |
| 1.1.4 | Building access, parking, and lobby credentials configured | Tom Walsh | Included in 1.1.3 |
| 1.2 | IT and Communications Infrastructure | Marcus Chen | $45,000 |
| 1.2.1 | Infrastructure design approved; procurement list finalized | Marcus Chen | $5,000 |
| 1.2.2 | Network cabling and hardware installed at new location | Marcus Chen | $22,000 |
| 1.2.3 | Server migration complete; parallel run period passed | Marcus Chen | $15,000 |
| 1.2.4 | All systems tested, accepted, and documented | Marcus Chen | $3,000 |
| 1.3 | Physical Relocation | Priya Kapoor | $18,000 |
| 1.3.1 | Moving contractor selected; contract signed | Priya Kapoor | $1,000 |
| 1.3.2 | Move schedule developed and confirmed with all teams | Priya Kapoor | Included in 1.3.1 |
| 1.3.3 | Physical move of all staff and equipment complete | Priya Kapoor | $15,000 |
| 1.3.4 | Current office decommissioned; returned to landlord | Tom Walsh | $2,000 |
| 1.4 | Staff Transition | Priya Kapoor | $5,000 |
| 1.4.1 | Staff communication program delivered | Priya Kapoor | $2,000 |
| 1.4.2 | Seating assignments and floor plan confirmed | Priya Kapoor | $500 |
| 1.4.3 | Move-week transition support provided | Priya Kapoor | $2,500 |
| 1.5 | Project Management | Sam Torres | $15,000 |
| 1.5.1 | Project management plan developed and approved | Sam Torres | Included in 1.5 |
| 1.5.2 | Biweekly status reports delivered through completion | Sam Torres | Included in 1.5 |
| 1.5.3 | Change control managed for project duration | Sam Torres | Included in 1.5 |
| 1.5.4 | Project formally closed: acceptance, lessons, archive | Sam Torres | Included in 1.5 |
| Subtotal (base estimate) | $163,000 | ||
| Contingency reserve | $22,000 | ||
| Total Approved Budget | $185,000 | ||
5. Project Schedule — Key Milestones
| Month | Milestone | Owner | Critical Path | Float |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Month 1 | Westfield lease signed (QG-1 passed) | Rachel Kim | Yes | 0 days |
| Month 2 | IT infrastructure design approved | Marcus Chen | Yes | 0 days |
| Month 2 | Fit-out contractor selected and contract signed | Tom Walsh | No | 15 days |
| Month 3 | Network cabling and hardware installation begins | Marcus Chen | Yes | 0 days |
| Month 3 | Fit-out groundwork begins (painting, partitions) | Tom Walsh | No | 15 days |
| Month 4 | Server room cabling complete; server room accepted | Marcus Chen | Yes | 0 days |
| Month 4 | Fit-out midpoint inspection (QG-2 passed) | Tom Walsh | No | 14 days |
| Month 5 | Office fit-out complete and accepted (QG-3 passed) | Tom Walsh | No | 14 days |
| Month 5–6 | Seating assignments confirmed; staff communications Month 5–6 sent | Priya Kapoor | No | 21 days |
| Month 6 | Server migration begins; parallel run period starts | Marcus Chen | Yes | 0 days |
| Month 7 | IT parallel run complete; systems accepted (QG-4 passed) | Marcus Chen | Yes | 0 days |
| Month 7 | Move date confirmed; moving contractor briefed | Priya Kapoor | No | 7 days |
| Month 8 | Physical move complete; all staff operational at new location | Priya Kapoor | Yes | 0 days |
| Month 8 | Current office returned to landlord (QG-5 passed) | Tom Walsh / Rachel Kim | Yes | 0 days |
6. Risk Register
| ID | Risk Description | P | I | Score | Owner | Response Strategy | Trigger / Watch Condition |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R-01 | Lease negotiation extends beyond Month 1 target, compressing all subsequent phases | High (4) | High (4) | 16 | Rachel Kim | Avoid: fast-track legal review from week one; backup property pre-identified in Westfield | No term sheet by end of week 3, Month 1 |
| R-02 | IT migration complexity exceeds estimate; parallel run reveals critical failures | Medium (3) | High (4) | 12 | Marcus Chen | Mitigate: Month 2 discovery sprint; parallel run buffer built into schedule; staged migration by system | Discovery sprint findings exceed 30% of estimate in any category |
| R-03 | Fit-out contractor delay; key trades unavailable during planned window | Medium (3) | Medium (3) | 9 | Tom Walsh | Mitigate: milestone payment structure incentivizes progress; weekly site visits; backup trade contact identified | Any milestone in fit-out plan missed by 5 or more days |
| R-04 | Fit-out cost overrun due to scope changes or material price increases | Medium (3) | High (4) | 12 | Sam Torres | Transfer: fixed-price contract for all fit-out scope; change order process for any variation; contingency reserve covers residual | Any contractor variation request above $5,000 |
| R-05 | Staff productivity loss during move week exceeds 4-week estimate | Medium (3) | Low (2) | 6 | Priya Kapoor | Accept (active): notify clients of potential delays two weeks before move; schedule move in low-activity period | Productivity survey at 2 weeks post-move |
| R-06 | Current landlord disputes exit condition; withholds deposit or claims damages | Low (2) | High (4) | 8 | Rachel Kim | Mitigate: exit terms confirmed in writing at project start; professional facility inspection before vacating | Any landlord communication questioning exit condition |
| R-07 | Key team member departs during project (Marcus Chen or Priya Kapoor) | Low (2) | Medium (3) | 6 | Elena Vasquez | Accept (active): cross-training documented monthly; knowledge log maintained; sponsor aware of succession risk | Any indicator of departure intent |
| R-08 | IT compatibility issues discovered late; systems cannot migrate cleanly | Low (2) | High (4) | 8 | Marcus Chen | Mitigate: compatibility checklist completed in Month 2 discovery sprint before cabling begins | Checklist identifies any system with compatibility gap |
Contingency reserve calculation: EMV of R-01 ($15,000) + R-02 ($8,000) + R-03 ($4,500) + R-04 ($7,000) + R-06 ($5,000) + R-08 ($6,000) = $45,500 gross EMV. Reserve set at $22,000 after applying sponsor's risk appetite (50% of gross EMV, rounded). Management reserve of $5,000 held separately by Elena Vasquez for unknown unknowns; not counted against the $185,000 project budget.
7. Quality Management Plan
| Gate | Deliverable | What Is Inspected | Pass Criteria | Who Accepts | Timing | Fail Consequence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| QG-1 | Lease execution | Lease terms: rental rate, exit clauses, maintenance responsibilities, floor plan as agreed | All standard Meridian lease requirements met; rate within budget; Rachel Kim confirms legally acceptable | Rachel Kim (legal); Sam Torres (budget) | Before signature | Lease not signed until all issues resolved; escalate to Elena Vasquez if negotiation fails |
| QG-2 | Fit-out midpoint | Structural work; painting; power and HVAC operational; server room shell ready | All structural items completed; no open defects preventing next phase; Tom Walsh signs checklist | Tom Walsh | End of Month 4 | Furniture installation halted until structural defects resolved |
| QG-3 | Fit-out completion | All furniture installed; signage in place; meeting rooms equipped; snag list cleared | Zero open P1/P2 snag items; Sam Torres walkthrough signed off | Sam Torres | End of Month 5 | Move date not confirmed until QG-3 passed |
| QG-4 | IT infrastructure | All business systems operational from new location; email, file storage, client systems, phone | Two-week parallel run with no P1 failures; all department heads confirm systems usable; Marcus Chen sign-off | Marcus Chen; department heads | End of Month 7 | Parallel run extended; move date pushed; escalate to Elena Vasquez |
| QG-5 | Old office exit | All equipment removed; surfaces in agreed lease-exit condition; landlord walkthrough | Landlord signs written confirmation; deposit return confirmed or damage claim process initiated | Tom Walsh; Rachel Kim | End of Month 8 | Dispute escalated to Rachel Kim (legal); documented and tracked to resolution |
8. Communications Management Plan
| Audience | Information | Frequency | Format | Owner | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elena Vasquez (Sponsor) | Project status: schedule, budget, open risks, decisions needed | Biweekly | 30-minute meeting + one-page status summary | Sam Torres | Immediate notification if any milestone variance >2 weeks or budget variance >$10,000 |
| Full project team | Progress, blockers, coordination needs, upcoming decisions | Weekly | 30-minute video standup; action items distributed same day | Sam Torres | Actions logged and owners confirmed before meeting ends |
| IT team | Technical progress: infrastructure milestones, migration issues | Weekly | 15-minute IT team standup | Marcus Chen | Marcus escalates to Sam within 24 hours on any P1/P2 technical issue |
| All 60 staff | Relocation updates: timeline, new office details, move-day logistics | Monthly through Month 6; biweekly Months 7–8 | Email from Elena Vasquez; FAQ updated on intranet same day | Priya Kapoor (drafts); Elena Vasquez (sends) | Intranet FAQ updated with each communication; staff questions routed to Priya Kapoor |
| Department heads | Seating assignments, transition logistics, move-day requirements by department | Monthly through Month 5; as-needed Month 6–8 | 30-minute group meeting; written summary distributed | Priya Kapoor | Each department head nominates a move coordinator from their team by end of Month 2 |
| Fit-out contractor | Work progress: milestone status, upcoming work, issues | Weekly | Site visit + written progress summary with photos | Tom Walsh | Tom shares summary with Sam after each visit; escalates any delay indicator immediately |
| Finance (budget) | Actuals versus plan: invoices, accruals, forecast to complete | Monthly | Budget report reviewed by Sam and Rachel Kim | Rachel Kim | Any invoice above $5,000 reviewed by Sam before payment authorization |
9. RACI Matrix
| Deliverable / Decision | Sam Torres (PM) | Elena Vasquez (COO) | Marcus Chen (IT) | Priya Kapoor (Ops) | Tom Walsh (Facilities) | Rachel Kim (Finance/Legal) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Project management plan | R | A | C | C | C | C |
| Site selection | A | C | I | R | R | C |
| Lease execution | C | A | I | I | I | R |
| Office fit-out | A | I | C | R | R | I |
| IT infrastructure design | C | I | A | I | I | I |
| IT infrastructure delivery | A | I | R | I | I | I |
| Moving contractor selection | A | I | I | R | C | C |
| Physical move | A | I | C | R | R | I |
| Staff communications (all-staff) | C | A | I | R | I | I |
| Budget management | R | A | C | C | C | C |
| Change control decisions (<$15K) | A | I | C | C | C | C |
| Change control decisions (>$15K) | R | A | C | C | C | C |
| Old office decommissioning | A | I | C | I | R | R |
| Project closure | R | A | I | I | I | I |
10. Quality Inspection Checklist — Fit-Out Acceptance (QG-3)
To be completed by Sam Torres at final fit-out walkthrough. All P1 items must be resolved before the move date is confirmed.
| Area | Inspection Item | Priority | Status | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Workstations | All 80 workstations have desk, chair, and power connection | P1 | [ ] Pass [ ] Fail | |
| Workstations | Monitor arms or secondary monitor brackets installed per spec | P2 | [ ] Pass [ ] Fail | |
| Meeting rooms | All 4 meeting rooms have table, chairs, and display screen operational | P1 | [ ] Pass [ ] Fail | |
| Meeting rooms | Video conferencing hardware installed and tested in each room | P1 | [ ] Pass [ ] Fail | |
| Server room | Server room door locks operational; access control configured | P1 | [ ] Pass [ ] Fail | |
| Server room | HVAC in server room functional; temperature within spec | P1 | [ ] Pass [ ] Fail | |
| Common areas | Kitchen fitted and appliances operational | P2 | [ ] Pass [ ] Fail | |
| Common areas | Reception desk, lobby furniture, and signage installed | P2 | [ ] Pass [ ] Fail | |
| Secure storage | Lockable cabinets for client document storage installed per legal team requirements | P1 | [ ] Pass [ ] Fail | Added per legal team request at external kickoff |
| Access | Building access cards issued and tested for all staff | P1 | [ ] Pass [ ] Fail | |
| Access | Parking assignments confirmed and communicated to staff | P3 | [ ] Pass [ ] Fail | |
| Painting | All walls painted to agreed colour specification; no touch-up items outstanding | P2 | [ ] Pass [ ] Fail | |
| Flooring | Flooring installed throughout; no lifting edges or gaps | P1 | [ ] Pass [ ] Fail | |
| Snag list | All P1 snag items from previous inspection resolved | P1 | [ ] Pass [ ] Fail |
Walkthrough completed by: Sam Torres, PM | Date: _____________ | QG-3 Status: [ ] Passed [ ] Conditional (P2/P3 items open) [ ] Failed (P1 items open)
AI-Prompt Engineering for Strategic Leaders
Stop managing administration and start leading the future. This course is built specifically for managers and project professionals who want to automate chaos and drive strategic value using the power of artificial intelligence.
We don't teach you how to program Python; we teach you how to program productivity. You will master the AI-First Mindset and the 'AI Assistant' model to hand off repetitive work like status reports and meeting minutes so you can focus on what humans do best: empathy, negotiation, and vision.
Learn the 5 Core Prompt Elements-Role, Goal, Context, Constraints, and Output-to get high-quality results every time. You will build chained sequences for complex tasks like auditing schedules or simulating risks, while navigating ethics and privacy with human-in-the-loop safeguards.
Move from being an administrative manager to a high-value strategic leader. Future-proof your career today with practical, management-focused AI workflows that map to your real-world challenges. Enroll now and master the language of the future.
Stop Managing Admin. Start Leading the Future!
HK School of Management helps you master AI-Prompt Engineering to automate chaos and drive strategic value. Move beyond status reports and risk logs by turning AI into your most capable assistant. Learn the core elements of prompt engineering to save hours every week and focus on high-value leadership. For the price of lunch, you get practical frameworks to future-proof your career and solve the blank page problem immediately. Backed by a 30-day money-back guarantee-zero risk, real impact.
Enroll Now