Justification
A dissemination plan is usually essential for take-up. Take-up in this case means the degree to which the target audience of the project, accept and assimilate what is granted to them. The take-up involved in a dissemination plan is thus crucial to the success of the project and to the subsequent sustainability of the productivities in the long term. Dissemination in form of a dissemination plan thus informs the community (in this case the ACB community) about what has been developed and the benefits of using it. The Dissemination Plan will classify and consolidate the events to be performed in the wake of the project, in their order of occurrence. The purpose of this is to endorse the commercial corruption of a project’s results by related entities. A dissemination plan also gives way to widespread propagation of knowledge from the specific project. The dissemination plan is normally extended in two orders of occurrence: based on a marketing nature in an attempt to augment the profitmaking prospective of the project, and also in a bid to notify or establish a project’s results in the technical and economic development segments.
Dissemination is a known to be a parallel, horizontally-biased activity which focuses on disseminating the results of a project itself to as many current and potential stakeholders as is practically possible. With this particular project, distinct attention will be paid to the dissemination of knowledge to other regions in North America through conference presentations and other techniques. On the other hand, a project timeline serves a different, yet closely related purpose. If a project is consistently underrated in terms of the time and effort that will be needed, there is high likelihood of occurrence of unnecessary shortages and this may affect the wellbeing of the project altogether. On the flipside, if time is overestimated, there may occur losses based on the fact that there may arise the incurring of unnecessary costs.
Concurrently, since a project timeline will give a clear breakdown of work activities and related undertakings, it provides a useful starting point. A project timeline thus determines whether a project can meet its goals, and thus, changes can be made as is necessary. Finally, a project timeline, if it so becomes a regular facade of a project’s undertaking, can be integrated into computer software hence making work much easier. Additionally, the justification for the implementation of an all-inclusive project timeline lies in its methodology. The structure of a project timeline allows for the creation of graphical modules of data representation. These include a Gantt chart, which specifically itemizes project tasks and also illustrates the interdependencies between the variables. The Gantt chart thus sets a base for definition of mileposts. The role of this chart in projects is to record and showing progress with the ultimatum of project completion.
A project timeline also allows for assignment of human resources towards the project, coupled with the evaluation of their apportionment with the aim of yielding the proper levels of exploitation. Some other methods of data representation in a timeline are program evaluation and review technique chart (PERT) or the complex use of histograms. Typically, a project timeline will ensure that an undertaking is accomplished in a mannerism that depicts quality, and this is before a new undertaking takes procession. There is, fittingly, a catch in ensuring that quality in terms of project work is met every step of the way. It is a guarantee that the researcher or project curator, as well as the project’s team, will address the problems in real time without having to wait until the final stretch. It is, therefore, an assurance that no problems shall likely appear upon completion, since the appropriate quality controls have been established, starting from the first step in the process, to the last. A project leader appreciates that guaranteeing quality mechanisms requires taking bold risks and exploiting any convenient channels supportive of the project. All these elements have the overall effect of speeding up the project development process, and consequently saving on other resources.
References
Smith, J. L., Williams, J. W., Owen, R. R., Rubenstein, L. V., & Chaney, E. (2008). Developing a national dissemination plan for collaborative care for depression: QUERI Series. Implementation Science, 3(1), 1.
Froyd, J. (2001). Developing a dissemination plan. In Frontiers in Education Conference, 2001. 31st Annual (Vol. 2, pp. F2G-18). IEEE.
Canadian Health Services Research Foundation. (2004). Communication notes: Developing a dissemination plan. Ottawa, Ontario: Canadian Health Services Research Foundation.
Swing, S. R. (2007). The ACGME outcome project: retrospective and prospective. Medical teacher, 29(7), 648-654.
Lawrence, R. (2006). Research dissemination: actively bringing the research and policy worlds together. Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, 373-384.
