v:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
Normal
0
false
false
false
false
EN-US
X-NONE
X-NONE
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:”Table Normal”;
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-parent:””;
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:”Times New Roman”,serif;
border:none;}
|
Learning Outcomes Covered by this assessment: 3. Analyse the strategic value of the operational cycle in organisations within both manufacturing and service sectors. 4.Analyse organisational capabilities and distinguish the essential features required at each stage of designing, planning, implementation, monitoring and controlling operations. 5.Compose a highly structured and clearly written business report to inform decisions at Board level. |
Assessment Task
Critically evaluate the importance and strategic contribution of the operations cycle and function within one of the following organisations. Your discussion should consider organisational capabilities and decision making uncertainties at all stages of the operations cycle and how they contribute to strategic value for the organisation concerned.
Present your discussion in the form of an internal report to the Board of the organisation chosen.
|
[Your choice of organisation MUST be different from that in Assessment 1] |
· American Apparel
· Zara Fashions
· Boeing
· Airbus
You may find the following generic information sources useful for your report:
· A good opening journey framing article can be found in the Harvard Business Review – : Blenko, M.W., Mankins, M. and Rogers P., (2010), The Decision Driven Organisation, HBR, June. Accessed at https://hbr.org/2010/06/the-decision-driven-organization July 2017
· Buchanan & O’Connell (2006) ‘ A Brief History of Decision Making’, HBR at https://hbr.org/2006/01/a-brief-history-of-decision-making
· Beresford & Sloper (2008), Understanding the Dynamics of Decision-Making and Choice:A Scoping Study of Key Psychological Theories to Inform The Design and Analysis of the Panel Study, University of York, SPRU, DHP 2215 January 2008 Accessed at: https://www.york.ac.uk/inst/spru/pubs/pdf/decisionmaking.pdf
· An interesting focus on social care services and human judgement and bias here: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/305516/RR337_-_Clinical_Judgement_and_Decision-Making_in_Childrens_Social_Work.pdf
· Lisia S. Dias, Marianthi G. Ierapetritou (2017), From process control to supply chain management: An overview of integrated decision making strategies, Computers & Chemical Engineering Accessed at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compchemeng.2017.02.006
Free books (all accessed July 2017)
· http://bookboon.com/en/operations-management-ebook
· http://bookboon.com/en/operations-strategy-ebook
· http://bookboon.com/en/fundamentals-of-supply-chain-management-ebook
· http://bookboon.com/en/strategic-analysis-of-supply-chain-design-ebook
You may find the following specific information useful for your report (depending upon the company you have chosen).
American Apparel (NB – this company was in receivership at the start of 2017 and is expected to relaunch shortly). All links accessed July 2017.
· https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcDFhv0VsTA – ABC Interview with Dov Charney in 2015
· Employees supporting Dov Charney in 2015 demo – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IeU6-EywA8A – 3 mins
· https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOWn5UIezMY – beating up a piñata of Paula Schneider (who replaced Dov Charney)!
· https://www.theguardian.com/business/2010/aug/25/rise-fall-american-apparel – financial weaknesses in Charney’s skills and his carnal interests but contrasted with his vision, passion and engagement with social liberation.
· See: http://gawker.com/5564171/life-at-american-apparel-the-employees-speak – on different perceptions of rationality between the workers and the employees at American Apparel
· Bloomberg’s breaking news on Dov Charney – 2014 – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LsFWsmCn40k
· Fortune interview with Paula is here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-XoZD2Fpjs over her departure from AA.
· http://www.scdigest.com/ontarget/15-10-12-2.php?cid=9813&ctype=content – and – http://www.newyorker.com/business/currency/can-american-apparel-afford-to-keep-making-clothes-in-the-u-s – are two articles raising questions over the historically important ‘ Made in America’ supply chain of American Apparel.
The strategy of AA see:
· Forbes 2016 article – http://www.forbes.com/sites/clareoconnor/2016/01/27/american-apparel-ceo-paula-schneider-we-will-grow-after-bankruptcy/#a2033ed11fbc
· https://www.fastcompany.com/3061612/fashion-forward/can-american-apparels-ceo-mend-its-seams
· Grant, R., (2015 – and varying editions), American Apparel, Case Study, Wiley.
· Wilson, M., (2015), American Apparel CEO talks turnaround with CSA accessed at http://www.chainstoreage.com/article/american-apparel-ceo-talks-turnaround-csa July 2017
· Some interesting blog posts (for information only) –
o http://improject2012.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/value-chain-of-american-apparel.html – July 2017
o https://blog.business-model-innovation.com/tag/american-apparel/ – July 2017
Zara Fashions – All links accessed July 2017.
· http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-11-14/2014-outlook-zaras-fashion-supply-chain-edge
· https://www.tradegecko.com/blog/zara-supply-chain-its-secret-to-retail-success
· Some interesting blog posts (for information only) – http://cmuscm.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/fashion-forward-zaras-supply-chain.html – July 2017
· O’Marah, K., (2016), Zara uses supply chain to win again, Forbes, March 9th, Accessed at https://www.forbes.com/sites/kevinomarah/2016/03/09/zara-uses-supply-chain-to-win-again/#9e5d2dc12564 July 2017
· Zhelyazkov, G., (N.D.), Agile Supply Chain: Zara’s case study analysis – Accessed at researchgate.net: https://www.researchgate.net July 2017
· An old but interesting early discussion of Zara by the Economist – Accessed at http://www.economist.com/node/627426 July 2017
Boeing & Airbus
· Corporate materials – see http://www.boeing.com/services/government/supply-chain-logistics.page Accessed July 2017
· Corporate materials – see http://company.airbus.com/company/for-suppliers.html Accessed July 2017
· Denning, S., (2013), What went wrong at Boeing, Strategy & Leadership; Chicago 41.3 (2013): 36-41.
· https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2013/01/21/what-went-wrong-at-boeing/#1874f2657b1b – Accessed July 2017
· Ram, R. and Starr, R. ,(2014), Challenges in the growing commercial aircraft sector, PWC report (Strategy&) Accessed at – https://www.strategyand.pwc.com/media/file/Finance-Monthly_Spotlight-on-Challenges-in-the-Growing-Commercial-Aircraft-Sector.pdf July 2017
· Broderick, S., (2017), Boeing supply chain streamlining pressure continues, Airline Aftermarket Accessed at https://airlineaftermarket.com/boeing-supply-chain-streamlining-pressure-continues/ July 2017
· Airbus and Boeing put pressure on supply chain, Financial Times, July 2016. Accessed at https://www.ft.com/content/e0d51872-516c-11e6-9664-e0bdc13c3bef July 2017 (this is firewall protected but the University has subscribed).
· Handfield, R., (2012), Airbus, Boeing, and CAT Discover Supplier Integration Comes Down to Hard Work, NC State University – Accessed at https://scm.ncsu.edu/blog/2012/07/11/airbus-boeing-and-cat-discover-supplier-integration-comes-down-to-hard-work/ July 2017
· Kotha, S. and Srinkanth, K., (2013), Managing a Global Partnership Model: Lessons from the Boeing 787 ‘Dreamliner’ Program, Global Strategy Journal, 3, pp. 41-66
· Wyman, O. ,(2015), Challenges for European Aerospace Suppliers, Marsh and McLennan Company report, Accessed at http://www.oliverwyman.com/content/dam/oliver-wyman/global/en/2015/mar/key-challenges-for-european-aerospace-suppliers.pdf July 2017
· Vossoughi, S., (2012), Today’s Best Companies are Horizontally Integrated, Harvard Business Review, December – Accessed at https://hbr.org/2012/12/todays-best-companies-are-hori July 2017
· Fujitsu Report – Visualizing the Value Chain (Airbus) – Accessed at http://www.fujitsu.com/us/vision/customerstories/airbus/ July 2017
· Gordon, S., (2014), Airbus – the European Model, Accessed at https://www.ft.com/content/c9a9a77c-db07-11e3-8273-00144feabdc0?mhq5j=e2 July 2017 (this is firewall protected but the University has subscribed).
All submissions are also graded (10%) against a fourth assessment criteria (see Assessment Grid) – Professional Skills.
Specific Assessment Guidance and Assessment Criteria
|
FORMAT & GUIDANCE
¨ Include a title page with your assessment number, title of your work, word count, module title & code, name of module tutor (and seminar tutor if relevant). ¨ Include a footer or header with student assessment number, module title & code. ¨ Word-processed work using MINIMUM 1.5-line spacing and Font size 12. ¨ All references should be constructed using the APA ¨ Use of Standard English and Academic Register– It is expected that your writing will conform to Standard English in terms of spelling, syntax and grammar ¨ Report format: This report should contain an introduction (50 words approx.), a conclusion (50 words approx.) and the main body (1900 words approx.). Subheadings are a requirement and you must include numbering for your sections. You should also have a title page, executive summary, the main report, a full references list and appendix (if necessary) – these are not counted in the word count for this assessment task. ¨ Write in full sentences and construct paragraphs around the issues you discuss. You can use bullet-point format, but try not to rely on this too much as it can restrict your ability to analyse. ¨ APA referencing is a requirement for this report. It is recommended that a minimum of 10 sources are referenced. Use credible academic sources where possible, e.g. textbooks and journal articles and avoid blogs, Wikipedia and other weakly referenced/unreferenced sources.
APA Reference Guide and Information can be found here: https://ganymede2.chester.ac.uk/index.php?page_id=1553173 and https://portal.chester.ac.uk/LIS/Pages/FindingInformation/referencing.aspx The Assessment Criteria are provided at the end of this assessment section. |
|
|
Submission Procedure
¨ Assignments must be submitted online via the Turnitin Submission Inbox on the Module page via the University of Chester Portal. ¨ It must be submitted before 12pm on the day that it is due ¨ Any late submissions will result in a 5 mark deduction per 24 hours.
Please follow the anonymous marking instructions. You should submit One copy of your assignment, with your assessment number (NOT your student number) clearly shown on the assignment. All student summative assessments that can be submitted electronically, and these will be subject to originality checks through the Turnitin software. Further information and guidance about Turnitin and step by step instructions on submission procedures are provided in the Student Guide to Online Submission. More information can be found here: https://portal.chester.ac.uk/registryservices/Pages/students-docs.aspx Late submission · Assessed work submitted late (without valid extension) will be penalised in accordance with the University’s guidelines as outlined in the University’s Handbook: The Assessment of Students. · The penalty incurred will be 5 marks for anything up to 24 hours after a deadline, and 5 marks per day after this (including weekends). · Non submission of assessed work will result in zero (0%) being awarded for that element of assessed work. · If you have to re-sit a piece of work there may be a financial charge levied for this and your grade will be capped at maximum mark of 40%. |
|
|
Academic Integrity Plagiarism – It is unethical and unacceptable to pass off someone else’s work, either published or unpublished, as your own. If you wish to refer to work other than your own, you must acknowledge it in your text. For further details on Academic Integrity: please visit the: University Handbook F: Quality and Standards Manual NB: Please refer to the following link for further information regarding Assessments, Reassessments, Principles and Regulation, Extensions and Late Work Policy, and for Full General Assessment Rules and Procedures: https://portal.chester.ac.uk/aqss/Pages/aqss-Handbook-F-Section-6.aspx Penalties for exceeding word count: University policy should be interpreted to allow a 10% over-run without penalty (e.g. 1000-word assignment is allowed 1100 words, 2000-word assignment is allowed 2200 words, and so on.)
Permissible word count excludes: student’s name, title of module and assignment, references to sources, bibliography, graphs, tables, maps, diagrams, captions and appendices. These lie outside the stated word limit.
Quotations inserted into the text and facts/arguments inserted into footnote/endnotes (beyond essential referencing) are INCLUDED in the word count. |
|
|
Support Resources · Academic Skills Support – students can get help with their academic work from SSG (Student Support and Guidance) through their study skills sessions whatever your level of study. More information can be found here: https://ganymede.chester.ac.uk/index.php?page_id=1710923&group=14 · Personal Academic Tutor – you should have a Personal Academic Tutor who should be able to provide help and advice on any matters which may affect your work and progress. · Module Lecturers – it is common for a module to be taught by a team of teachers, who together will deliver lectures and seminars, help you understand your assignments and mark your work. Ensure you ask questions and attend assessment tutorials when they are offered. |
|
|
The assessment criteria are used to measure student performance: how well you have fulfilled the specific learning outcomes of the module. The same criteria can apply to each level, because the learning outcomes are graduated by level. The learning outcomes at different levels define the complexity of understanding and skills that you must achieve in that module. The criteria offer descriptions of standards of achievement relating to four types of learning outcome, and four separate charts of these appear below: · Knowledge and understanding · Cognitive skills · Practical or professional skills · Communication skills.
There are various descriptors under these headings, describing different aspects of understanding or skill. Assessors use the ones that apply to the particular outcomes you should demonstrate: if the learning outcomes of your module do not require (for example) practical skills, then those criteria do not apply. Because not all of the criteria will apply to each module, different departments and faculties in the University may customise these criteria to describe how they apply to your particular area of study or to a particular type of assessment. They may also customise them to show how they interpret and apply them at different levels (4–6). In these cases, they will publish the criteria for you to see. These discipline-specific, task-specific and level-specific criteria will always conform to the institutional criteria set out here: they will specify, not contradict them.
|
|
|
Assessment Criteria (% weightings noted in brackets) |
ILO |
0-9% |
10-19% |
20-29% |
30-39% |
40-44% |
45-49% |
50-59% |
60-69% |
70-79% |
80% -89% |
90% and higher |
|
1) Critical Analysis (Value Choices) Analysis of the importance of speed, quality, cost, dependability and flexibility of the organisation’s supply chain. (20%) Focus upon: Knowledge & Intellectual Skills |
3 |
Anecdotal, unreferenced and uncited material is presented in an incoherent manner that has no relationship to the performance parameters. Argument development will be opinion without coherence or focus |
The work will have no evidence of reading or understanding focused performance parameters. Cited sources are likely to be few / missing and unrelated to the task. No attempt to offer an analysis / evaluation nor develop a coherent structure to the articulation of evidence. |
The work will have no evidence of relevant reading or understanding focused upon the performance parameters . Cited sources (where available) are likely to be questionable or of very limited relevance. A clear lack of awareness of subject specific understanding will be evident. The analysis will be confused / incomplete/unsupported in significant sections of the work. Very limited attempt to question presented information and the work is likely to be wholly descriptive. |
The work will have an insufficient range of literature and arguments relevant to understanding the performance parameters of the supply chain and work activities for the organisation. These will be constrained to core sources with no further / wider reading evidenced. Awareness of the literature and arguments will be insufficient to support a basic understanding of the design dimensions. The analysis will be superficial / incomplete and simplistic. It is likely the analysis will be descriptive. |
These will be constrained to core sources with no further / wider reading evidenced. Awareness therefore of the literature and arguments will be minimally basic concerning the performance parameters of the supply chain and work activities. The analysis will comprise a poor and simplistic attempt to synthesise information. This may be wholly inconsistent throughout the work. Potential for conflicting arguments to be identified and/or Tensions and conflict between the design dimensions may remain unaddressed. A focus and direction for the outcomes of the work is likely to be missing. |
The work will have a sufficient range of literature and arguments relevant to understanding the performance parameters of the supply chain and work activities for the organisation. These will (likely) be constrained to core sources with little/no further / wider reading. No evidence offered of both a significant breadth of awareness and context for the cited literature and understanding. Awareness therefore of the literature and arguments will be minimal and reflect basic awareness of the design dimensions only. The analysis will comprise a poor attempt to synthesise information and offered argument with high levels of inconsistency throughout and (potentially likely) anecdotal / uncorroborated statements used. |
The work will have a reasonable range of literature and arguments relevant to understanding the performance parameters of the supply chain and work activities for the organisation. These may be constrained to core sources however. There may be little to no evidence offered however of both a significant breadth of awareness and context for the cited literature and understanding. Awareness therefore of the literature and arguments will be acceptable / sufficient. The analysis will be a good attempt to synthesise information and offered argument but may not be consistent in achieving this goal. Little evidence offered of independent observations in the arguments presented |
The work will have a strong and wide understanding of the key literature and arguments relevant to understanding the performance parameters of the supply chain and work activities for the organisation and concerned. Limited evidence is offered of both a significant breadth of awareness and context for the cited literature and understanding. The analysis will be a very good synthesis of information and offered argument. The analysis developed in the work will (probably) contain some independent observations that may require further development. |
The work will have an excellent and extensive understanding of the key (and beyond) literature relevant to understanding the performance parameters of the supply chain and work activities for the organisation and sector concerned. Clear but constrained/limited evidence is offered of both significant breadth of awareness and context for the cited literature and understanding. The analysis will be convincing in a balanced manner by offering clear arguments and appropriate evidence. The analysis developed in the work will be rigorous, and authoritative. |
The work will have an excellent, extensive and clear understanding of the key (and significantly beyond) literature relevant to understanding the performance parameters of the supply chain and work activities for the organisation and sector concerned. Some evidence is offered of both significant breadth of awareness and context for the cited literature and understanding. The analysis will juxtapose in a balanced but purposeful manner, the arguments and evidence offered. The analysis developed in the work will be rigorous, persuasive and authoritative. |
The work will have an exemplary understanding of the key knowledge and understanding relevant to the performance parameters of the supply chain and work activities for the organisation and sector concerned. There will be both a breadth of awareness and context. The analysis developed in the work will be rigorous, persuasive and authoritative. The analysis will be positioned to contribute new/radical/innovative insights through the use of the selected literature and the presented argument construction. |
|
1st Marker │2nd Marker |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2) Critical Analysis (Operational Choices) Analysis of the 4 Vs of the supply chain(s) for the chosen organisation.
(20%)
Focus upon: Knowledge & Intellectual Skills |
3,4 |
Anecdotal, unreferenced and uncited material is presented in an incoherent manner that has no relationship to the design dimensions. Argument development will be opinion without coherence or focus |
The work will have no evidence of reading or understanding focused design dimensions. Cited sources are likely to be few / missing and unrelated to the task. No attempt to offer an analysis / evaluation nor develop a coherent structure to the articulation of evidence. |
The work will have no evidence of relevant reading or understanding focused upon the design dimensions . Cited sources (where available) are likely to be questionable or of very limited relevance. A clear lack of awareness of subject specific understanding will be evident. The analysis will be confused / incomplete/unsupported in significant sections of the work. Very limited attempt to question presented information and the work is likely to be wholly descriptive. |
The work will have an insufficient range of literature and arguments relevant to understanding the design of the supply chain and work activities for the organisation. These will be constrained to core sources with no further / wider reading evidenced. Awareness of the literature and arguments will be insufficient to support a basic understanding of the design dimensions. The analysis will be superficial / incomplete and simplistic. It is likely the analysis will be descriptive. |
These will be constrained to core sources with no further / wider reading evidenced. Awareness therefore of the literature and arguments will be minimally basic concerning the design of the supply chain and work activities. The analysis will comprise a poor and simplistic attempt to synthesise information. This may be wholly inconsistent throughout the work. Potential for conflicting arguments to be identified and/or Tensions and conflict between the design dimensions may remain unaddressed. A focus and direction for the outcomes of the work is likely to be missing. |
The work will have a sufficient range of literature and arguments relevant to understanding the design of the supply chain and work activities for the organisation. These will (likely) be constrained to core sources with little/no further / wider reading. No evidence offered of both a significant breadth of awareness and context for the cited literature and understanding. Awareness therefore of the literature and arguments will be minimal and reflect basic awareness of the design dimensions only. The analysis will comprise a poor attempt to synthesise information and offered argument with high levels of inconsistency throughout and (potentially likely) anecdotal / uncorroborated statements used. |
The work will have a reasonable range of literature and arguments relevant to understanding the design of the supply chain and work activities for the organisation. These may be constrained to core sources however. There may be little to no evidence offered however of both a significant breadth of awareness and context for the cited literature and understanding. Awareness therefore of the literature and arguments will be acceptable / sufficient. The analysis will be a good attempt to synthesise information and offered argument but may not be consistent in achieving this goal. Little evidence offered of independent observations in the arguments presented |
The work will have a strong and wide understanding of the key literature and arguments relevant to understanding the design of the supply chain and work activities for the organisation and concerned. Limited evidence is offered of both a significant breadth of awareness and context for the cited literature and understanding. The analysis will be a very good synthesis of information and offered argument. The analysis developed in the work will (probably) contain some independent observations that may require further development. |
The work will have an excellent and extensive understanding of the key (and beyond) literature relevant to understanding the design of the supply chain and work activities for the organisation and sector concerned. Clear but constrained/limited evidence is offered of both significant breadth of awareness and context for the cited literature and understanding. The analysis will be convincing in a balanced manner by offering clear arguments and appropriate evidence. The analysis developed in the work will be rigorous, and authoritative. |
The work will have an excellent, extensive and clear understanding of the key (and significantly beyond) literature relevant to understanding the design of the supply chain and work activities for the organisation and sector concerned. Some evidence is offered of both significant breadth of awareness and context for the cited literature and understanding. The analysis will juxtapose in a balanced but purposeful manner, the arguments and evidence offered. The analysis developed in the work will be rigorous, persuasive and authoritative. |
The work will have an exemplary understanding of the key knowledge and understanding relevant to the design of the supply chain and work activities for the organisation and sector concerned. There will be both a breadth of awareness and context. The analysis developed in the work will be rigorous, persuasive and authoritative. The analysis will be positioned to contribute new/radical/ innovative insights through the use of the selected literature and the presented argument construction. |
|
1st Marker │2nd Marker |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3) Critical Analysis (Structural & Implementational Choices) Analysis of the structure, location and layout of the supply chain(s) for the chosen organisation (20%).
Focus upon: Knowledge & Intellectual Skills |
3,4 |
Anecdotal, unreferenced and uncited material is presented in an incoherent manner that has no relationship to the implementational aspects. Argument development will be opinion without coherence or focus |
The work will have no evidence of reading or understanding focused upon implementational aspects. Cited sources are likely to be few / missing and unrelated to the task. No attempt to offer an analysis / evaluation nor develop a coherent structure to the articulation of evidence. |
The work will have no evidence of relevant reading or understanding focused upon implementational aspects of the work . Cited sources (where available) are likely to be questionable or of very limited relevance. A clear lack of awareness of subject specific understanding will be evident. The analysis will be confused / incomplete/unsupported in significant sections of the work. Very limited attempt to question presented information and the work is likely to be wholly descriptive. |
The work will have an insufficient range of literature and arguments relevant to understanding the design of the implementational aspects and work activities for the organisation. These will be constrained to core sources with no further / wider reading evidenced. Awareness of the literature and arguments will be insufficient to support a basic understanding of the design dimensions. The analysis will be superficial / incomplete and simplistic. It is likely the analysis will be descriptive. |
These will be constrained to core sources with no further / wider reading evidenced. Awareness therefore of the literature and arguments will be minimally basic concerning the design of the implementational aspects and work activities. The analysis will comprise a poor and simplistic attempt to synthesise information. This may be wholly inconsistent throughout the work. Potential for conflicting arguments to be identified and/or Tensions and conflict between the design dimensions may remain unaddressed. A focus and direction for the outcomes of the work is likely to be missing. |
The work will have a sufficient range of literature and arguments relevant to understanding the design of the implementational aspects and work activities for the organisation. These will (likely) be constrained to core sources with little/no further / wider reading. No evidence offered of both a significant breadth of awareness and context for the cited literature and understanding. Awareness therefore of the literature and arguments will be minimal and reflect basic awareness of the design dimensions only. The analysis will comprise a poor attempt to synthesise information and offered argument with high levels of inconsistency throughout and (potentially likely) anecdotal / uncorroborated statements used. |
The work will have a reasonable range of literature and arguments relevant to understanding the design of the implementational aspects and work activities for the organisation. These may be constrained to core sources however. There may be little to no evidence offered however of both a significant breadth of awareness and context for the cited literature and understanding. Awareness therefore of the literature and arguments will be acceptable / sufficient. The analysis will be a good attempt to synthesise information and offered argument but may not be consistent in achieving this goal. Little evidence offered of independent observations in the arguments presented |
The work will have a strong and wide understanding of the key literature and arguments relevant to understanding the design of the implementational aspects and work activities for the organisation and concerned. Limited evidence is offered of both a significant breadth of awareness and context for the cited literature and understanding. The analysis will be a very good synthesis of information and offered argument. The analysis developed in the work will (probably) contain some independent observations that may require further development. |
The work will have an excellent and extensive understanding of the key (and beyond) literature relevant to understanding the design of the implementational aspects and work activities for the organisation and sector concerned. Clear but constrained/limited evidence is offered of both significant breadth of awareness and context for the cited literature and understanding. The analysis will be convincing in a balanced manner by offering clear arguments and appropriate evidence. The analysis developed in the work will be rigorous, and authoritative. |
The work will have an excellent, extensive and clear understanding of the key (and significantly beyond) literature relevant to understanding the implementational aspects of the supply chain and work activities for the organisation and sector concerned. Some evidence is offered of both significant breadth of awareness and context for the cited literature and understanding. The analysis will juxtapose in a balanced but purposeful manner, the arguments and evidence offered. The analysis developed in the work will be rigorous, persuasive and authoritative. |
The work will have an exemplary understanding of the key knowledge and understanding relevant to the implementational aspects of the supply chain and work activities for the organisation and sector concerned. There will be both a breadth of awareness and context. The analysis developed in the work will be rigorous, persuasive and authoritative. The analysis will be positioned to contribute new/radical/innovative insights through the use of the selected literature and the presented argument construction. |
|
1st Marker │2nd Marker |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4) Critical Analysis (Capability Choices) Analysis of the organisational fit with choices discussed in criteria 1,2 and 3 and the firm environment. (30%).
Focus upon: Knowledge & Intellectual Skills |
3,4 |
No evidenced engagement with this focus upon process and goal alignment |
No clear evidence is offered of an understanding regarding the alignment of process activities and design with the scope of the offer from the organisation |
Significant and critical gaps in understanding is evidenced regarding the alignment of process activities and design with the scope of the offer from the organisation |
An sufficient understanding is evidenced regarding the alignment of process activities and design with the scope of the offer from the organisation |
A limited and constrained understanding is evidenced regarding the alignment of process activities and design with the scope of the offer from the organisation |
A minimal understanding is evidenced regarding the alignment of process activities and design with the scope of the offer from the organisation |
A largely considered understanding is evidenced regarding the alignment of process activities and design with the scope of the offer from the organisation |
A developed and sufficient understanding is evidenced regarding the alignment of process activities and design with the scope of the offer from the organisation |
A very good and developed understanding is evidenced regarding the alignment of process activities and design with the scope of the offer from the organisation |
An Excellent understanding is evidenced regarding the alignment of process activities and design with the scope of the offer from the organisation |
An exemplary understanding is evidenced regarding the alignment of process activities and design with the scope of the offer from the organisation |
|
5) Professional Skills (Format, research, presentation) The evidenced offered of report format quality and presentation, use of appropriate referenced materials (quality and volume), use of the academic register and English. (10%)
Focus upon: Transferable and Key Skills |
5 |
Incohorent expression throughout the work.Major/most writing will be inappropriate in its use of language and the academic register. No sources identified. |
The meanings derived from the writing will be very difficult to identify. Basic errors in the use of English will be evident with little/no engagement in the use of the academic register . No sources identified. |
Writing will be difficult to interpret consistently and lack clarity. Inappropriate language/terminology will be evident and there will be a large and significant number of persistent inaccuracies in spelling, grammar and the use of the academic register. Insufficient / no range of sources offered. |
Writing will be sufficiently accessible to derive meaning and interpretation from, but otherwise be simplistic and lack evidence of exoression. Paragraph and sentence structures can give rise to some confusion/conflicting statements with ambiguities in the writing. A significant number of persistent inaccuracies in spelling, grammar and the use of the academic register will be evident that risk hiding meaning in the writing presented. Insufficient range of sources offered |
Writing will be reasonably clear but may lack development of sophisticated paragraph and sentence structures and may give rise to some confusion/conflicting statements or ambiguities in the writing. Some persistent inaccuracies in spelling, grammar and the use of the academic register may be evident. Sufficient range of sources offered. |
Writing will be reasonably clear but may lack development of sophisticated paragraph and sentence structures. Some inaccuracies in spelling, grammar and the use of the academic register may be evident. Sufficient range of appropriate sources offered |
Clearly written and presented in most parts of the work. Good range of authoritative sources used and presented. Meets expectations for volume of sources used (but will not be as extensive as potentially it could have been to extend the work). Largely consistent in use of conventions and academic register throughout. |
Clear, (largely) fluent use of authoritative sources and their presentation. Volume of sources/reading may not be as extensive as potentially it could have been to extend the work. Largely consistent in use of conventions and academic register throughout. |
Clear, fluent use of authoritative sources, extended volume and their presentation and articulation. Expected to be consistent in use of conventions and academic register throughout. |
Outstanding use of authoritative sources, volume, their presentation and articulation. Consistent in use of conventions and academic register throughout. |
Exemplary use of authoritative sources, volume, their presentation and articulation. Consistent in use of conventions and academic register throughout. |
|
1st Marker │2nd Marker |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|