The IGNOU MCom project looks manageable when students first study the handbook. One report, fixed layout, only a couple of chapters and a clear deadline for submission. Many students think it will be similar to assignments they've already completed. The confusion kicks in once work begins.

Most problems in projects aren't in the realm of effort or intelligence. They arise from small but repeatedly made mistakes that reduce the effectiveness of the project. They are common easily avoided, and predictable. However, every year a large number of IGNOU MCom students repeat them and must face delays or revisions.

Making these mistakes early on can help you save time, money and stress.

Choosing a topic without checking whether it is practical

The first mistake is at the topic choice stage. Students choose topics that appear appealing however are difficult to carry out.

Some topics are too wide. Other topics require data that's not available. Others rely on organizations who refuse to give permission. Later, students cut the scope of their studies randomly or attempt to prove weak data.

A great MCom project topic is not about complexity. It's about a feasibility. It should meet the requirements of available time with data access and student comprehension.

Before finalizing a course, students should ask one simple question. What can I realistically accomplish with the resources I have.

A vague set of goals written in a way that guides you to do nothing

Objectives should be used to guide the entire project. When it comes to many IGNOU MCom projects, objectives are created solely to fill up space.

Students write general phrases like to study impact or to study performance without clearly defining the particulars of what they intend to study. This type of objective is not helpful when deciding the method of analysis or methodology.

When the purpose is unclear every chapter can be a bit confusing. Data collection feels random. Analysis lacks direction.

Clear objectives act as an outline. Without them, all good data is sloppy.

The review of literature is treated as copied content

A common error is to copy a literature review from websites, old work, or online repositories. Students are taught that a lengthy literature review equates to a quality project.

IGNOU examiners look for understanding not just volume. They require students to link earlier studies with their current particular area of study.

A literature review should describe the research that has been conducted and explain how the present project will fit. A lack of explanation in a literature review indicates lack of commitment.

The act of phrasing text without understanding increases the chance of plagiarism, even if students do not intend to copy.

Insufficient explanation of method

Methodology is a place where students panic. They are aware of what they did but cannot explain it academically.

Some chapters on methodology copy from other projects without matching it to their own work. This causes a mismatch between the objectives in terms of data, methodology, and objective.

The methodology should describe why a choice was made, the process used to collect data was collected, as well as how analysis was carried out. The method does not need to be complicated language. It's in need of clarity.

A simple and honest methodology is always better than an elaborate copycat one.

Data collection without any relevance

Students will sometimes gather data to get it available, not because it answers requirements. Surveys are conducted without the proper structure. There is no connection between the questions and research goals.

In the later stages of analysis students have trouble interpreting results effectively. Charts look good, but conclusions feel forced.

Data should serve the project and not serve as a decoration. Every question you ask for should be tied to at least one primary goal.

The best projects use less information but they explain it clearly.

A poor interpretation of the findings

Lots of IGNOU MCom projects include tables and graphs but do not explain what they do. Students believe that numbers speak for itself.

Examiners expect interpretation. What does this number mean. What's the significance behind this trend. What is it's relation to the goals.

In words, repeating numbers is no way to interpret. Understanding the meaning of words is.

Uncertain interpretation makes the analysis chapter feel void.

Indifference to IGNOU format guidelines

Incorrect formatting mistakes aren't that significant, but costly. A wrong font size, improper spacing, missing certificates or a bad chapter's order cause difficulties when it comes to submission.

Some students correct format only when they are done, which leads to rushed mistakes.

IGNOU formatting guidelines must following from beginning. This reduces time, and also prevents the panic of a last-minute deadline.

Good formatting makes the project more easy to read and evaluate.

Over-speeding the closing chapter

The chapter that concludes is usually written in a hurry. Students summarise chapters rather than the presentation of findings.

A concluding paragraph should be clear and explains what was found out, not the words written. It should tie findings with goals and give practical recommendations.

Conclusions that are weak make the project feel a bit rushed, even in the case of good chapters earlier on.

Insisting too much on the fixings that last a minute

Many students stall their projects in the belief that it can be completed quickly. Research writing is not able to work this way.

Last-minute writing causes negligence, faulty analyses, as well as formatting problems.

Steady progress with small intervals decreases pressure, and also improves the quality of work.

Afraid of asking for money

Students aren't always willing to seek help. They feel that asking questions shows the weakness of their students.

Academic projects require guidance. Teachers, supervisors, and academic assistance exist for a reason.

It is important to identify any doubts early, so that you can avoid mistakes later.

Finding help from ignou mcom projects for understanding and structure is not a crime. It's practical.

Uncertainty about academic help

There is a mismatch between guidance and unfair practices. Ethical academic support helps students better understand the expectations, improve their English as well as structure their work.

It does not create content or write information.

Students who receive help often comprehend their work better and perform better during evaluation.

Not evaluating the entire project in its entirety

Students typically focus on chapters separately, but they do not always read the entire project in one document. This causes repetition, inconsistency, and discord.

Reviewing the entire document once uncovers errors and gaps which otherwise are missed.

This simple step improves overall coherence substantially.

The value of learning to avoid these errors

Making sure you avoid common mistakes will do more than just guarantee approval. It helps students understand basic research concepts.

The MCom project can be the very first research experience. Handling it properly builds confidence for the future.

Students who learn research discipline during MCom are more successful in the higher education system and professional tasks.

A real conclusion thought

IGNOU MCOM project report (http://www.career4.co.kr/bbs/board.php?bo_table=ci_consulting&wr_id=363075) MCom projects do not do well because students are not able. They fail because the students are unaware of expectations.

Most mistakes are common and easy to avoid. Be aware, plan and guidance can make all the difference.

When students focus at clarity instead of the complexity it makes projects easier to complete and easier to review.

That is how IGNOU MCom projects should be taken care of, in a manner that is calm, pragmatic and with the correct understanding.