Get Cheapest Assignment in Australia, UK, US, UAE, Canada and NZ Order Now

MGT610 Organisational Best Practice Part B

0 Comments

MGT610 Organisational Best practice Assignment 1 Part B

ASSESSMENT 2 BRIEF
Subject Code and Title MGT610 Organisational Best Practice
Assessment Case Study Analysis; Part B
Individual/Group Individual
Length 2500 words
Learning Outcomes This assessments addresses the following Subject Learning Outcomes: Critically analyse the role that best practice play in organisational competitivenessEvaluate organisational performance against best practice benchmarks and apply these benchmarks to establish organisational improvements
Submission Due by 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Friday of Module 4.2 (Week 8).
Weighting 40%
Total Marks 40 marks

Context

Once an opportunity for business improvement has been identified, solutions must be developed and assessed with a view of their holistic effects on the business’s long-term sustainability. This “future-proofing” assessment asks you to build on your understanding of benchmarking by developing scenarios related to the opportunity for business improvement identified in Case Study Analysis; Part A. Your analysis should specify a range of potential outcomes and specify metrics and processes by which the enterprise’s executive can track progress and/or measure the impact of changes.

These scenarios are intended to inform decisions made by executive management about the future direction of the organisation. As such, you should write a report for executive management that recommends a particular course of action and the benchmarks by which its progress and success can be measured.

Instructions

For the organisation for which you completed Assessment 1, Case Study Analysis; Part A you now need to present at least three (3) alternative futures that could occur for this organisation over a period of up to five (5) years in response to changes to the business environment. Choose your preferred one (1) of these futures and identify key benchmarks and milestones you would use to ensure your organisation is maximising the benefits from the opportunity that this scenario presents.

Output/deliverables and parameters of the assessment:

You should submit a report for the attention of the CEO/Managing Director of the organisation you chose in Assessment 1, Case Study Analysis; Part A which should be no more than 12 pages in length including references and appendices, and should include a minimum of four (4) benchmark measures in the discussion. The report should clearly identify a preferred scenario that may emerge from the effect of several environmental factors on the organisation with respect to the business improvement opportunity identified. The report should recommend a set of at least four (4) benchmarks with milestones that can be used to assess the organisation’s long-term business sustainability and progress towards this scenario.

Whilst the format may vary for your report, below is suggested format for you to follow:

  • Cover page
  • Executive Summary [approximately 400 words]
    • A concise summary of the main report in bullet points
  • Introduction (approx. 300 words)
    • Outline the opportunity identified in the enterprise’s operation.
  • Main Discussion / Weakness [1000- 1500 words]
    • What environmental factors may affect the opportunity identified?
    • Propose at least three scenarios likely to emerge from these possible effects.
    • Which scenario is preferred for the organisation’s long-term sustainability?
    • What benchmarks and milestones can be used to assess the organisation’s progress towards this preferred scenario?
  • Recommendations / Conclusion [300 words]
    • Why is this analysis significant?
    • What steps should be taken from here?
  • Appendices where applicable

Your case study will be assessed based on the Rubric below and is limited to a word count of 2500 words excluding the cover page.

Referencing:

You must recognise all sources of information; including images that you include in your work. Reference your work according to the APA 6th edition guidelines. Please see more information on referencing here http://library.laureate.net.au/research_skills/referencing

Submission Instructions

Submit your report in the Assessment 2 Case Study Analysis; Part B submission link in the Assessment section found in the main navigation menu of the subject Blackboard site. A rubric will be attached to the assessment. The Learning Facilitator will provide feedback via the Grade Centre in the LMS portal. Feedback can be viewed in My Grades.

Please note the following additional information

  • You should adhere to the correct use of academic writing, presentation and grammar.
  • It is important to check your similarity in turnitin. All sentences highlighted must be either paraphrased in your own words or put in quotes and referenced accordingly. You should be

aiming for as low a similarity score as you can. Similarity highlighted in a contents page, reference list or appendices is nothing to be concerned about.

  • It is important to adopt the appropriate use of the APA 6th edition style when citing and referencing research. Please comply with all academic standards of legibility, referencing and bibliographical details (including reference list).
  • You are advised to include a minimum of five (5) academic references which should be textbooks or academic journals. Appropriate websites may be used in addition to these.
  • The attached learning rubric guides the marker when awarding marks for your essay. You should review your paper in line with this, to ensure there is nothing you have missed.

Assessment Rubric: MGT610 Assessment 1 Case Study Analysis; Part B

Assessment Attributes Fail (Unacceptable) 0-49% Pass (Functional) 50-64% Credit (Proficient) 65-74% Distinction (Advanced) 75 -84% High Distinction (Exceptional) 85-100%
Applied knowledge of business analysis in creating future scenarios.     25% Limited understanding of required concepts and knowledge   Key components of the assignment are not all addressed. Adequate Knowledge or understanding of the field or discipline.   Key components of the assignment are all addressed.   Often conflates/confuses assertion of personal opinion with information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials. Thorough knowledge or understanding of the field or discipline/s.   Supports personal opinion and information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials.   Explores the limits & strengths of current knowledge   Demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts. Highly developed understanding of the field or discipline/s.   Discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading.   Evaluates the limits & strengths of current knowledge.   Well demonstrated capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts. Demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of the field or discipline/s.   Systematically and critically discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading.   Extends the limits & strengths of current knowledge.   Mastery of concepts and application to new situations/further learning.
  Application with synthesis of new   Limited synthesis and analysis.   Demonstrated analysis and synthesis of new   Well-developed analysis and synthesis with   Thoroughly developed and creative analysis and   Highly sophisticated and creative analysis,


knowledge in developing benchmarks for future performance.     25%   Limited application/recommend ations based upon analysis. knowledge with application.   Shows the ability to interpret relevant information and literature. application of recommendations linked to analysis/synthesis. synthesis with application of pretested models and / or independently developed models and justified recommendations linked to analysis/synthesis. synthesis of new with existing knowledge.   Strong application by way of pretested models and / or independently developed models. Recommendations are clearly justified based on the analysis/synthesis. Applying knowledge to new situations/other cases.
Evaluation of strategic position and strategic options in selecting preferred outcomes.   25% Specific positions and options fail to take into account complexities or positions and options are unsupported. Presents and succinctly discusses relevant and supported strategic position and options. Presents and succinctly discusses relevant and supported strategic position and options and includes limitations. Presents and succinctly discusses relevant and supported strategic position and options and includes limitations and implications. Presents and succinctly discusses relevant and supported strategic position and options, includes limitations and implications, and offers alternatives.
    Effective Communication       25%   Difficult to understand for audience, no logical/clear structure, poor flow of ideas, argument lacks supporting evidence.   Audience cannot follow the line of reasoning.   Information, arguments and evidence are presented in a way that is not always clear and logical.   Line of reasoning is often difficult to follow.   Information, arguments and evidence are well presented, mostly clear flow of ideas and arguments.   Line of reasoning is easy to follow.   Information, arguments and evidence are very well presented; the presentation is logical, clear and well supported by evidence.   Demonstrates cultural sensitivity.   Expertly presented; the presentation is logical, persuasive, and well supported by evidence, demonstrating a clear flow of ideas and arguments.   Engages and sustains audience’s interest in the topic, demonstrates high

Check latest posts