I managed to get the Operations Management, 5th edition (by Slack, Nigel, Chambers, Stuart, Johnston, Robert). Could you please confirm if this is the right book to cover Unit 1 – 3?
As noted elsewhere, if you cannot readily find either of the recommended textbooks for the Operations Management units, any contemporary book will be fine and you can relate the relevant chapters to the topics indicated in the reading list. So yes.
Assessments and Academic writing
You have seen so far aspects related to a more general view of the programme. This unit’s aim is to familiarize you with aspects of taking the assessments and writing in an academic setting, such as your required essays for the different modules in the MSc in Procurement, Logistics and Supply Chain Management programme.
There is a plethora of resources on and off the web on academic writing in English. As with most things, going through an important part of the literature can take a lot of time, but some items are more important than others, and those are the ones we shall present here.
The knowledge you gained will be tested in each module through relevant assessment. Please take the time to familiarise yourself with the assessment regulations and policies:
A critical skill at Master level is bibliography (or reference) management.
You can find below two guides on Harvard style referencing (under Resources).
Most word processing programs (such as Microsoft’s Word versions, or OpenOffice and LibreOffice) come with built in Bibliography managers, you may find these articles useful depending on your version of program:
1. Ms Word: http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/word-help/create-a-bibliography-HA010067492.aspx
2. OpenOffice / LibreOffice: http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/OOoAuthors_User_Manual/Writer_Guide/Creating_a_bibliography
OIM Final Assessment:Craven BooksReport
Semester 3, 2016-2017
Electronically through OnlineCampus
This assignment is in four parts.
|Part A||Analysis – Business Process Models and strategy analysis||1000 (equivalent to)||25|
|Part B||Open Source Software Comparison Table||500 (equivalent to)||25|
|Part D||Reflection on your contribution to the online discussion and wiki||250||10|
You should include all parts in a single document
Relates to Learning Outcomes:
You are required to follow the University’s regulations regarding plagiarism and citing sources and references used. Assignments may not be submitted late. Marking penalties for late submission will follow the University regulations for PMC and late submission.
Submission of Assessment:
Please submit an electronic copy of your assessment via OnlineCampus; the fileshould be in Word format.
This growth strategy has led to an accelerating volume of sales. Accordingly, the company had to process customer orders in batches and recruit qualified store manager and IT specialist to develop a digital strategy consistent with their business strategy.
Once he was appointed, the IT manager outsourced the digital strategy to an independent IT consultant who decided to set-up two technological tools for the internal and external processes. Internally, a weighing machine was brought to the store to help checking the right order through weight check. An electronic mapping machine was also attached to this weighing machine in the store area to link the customers’ order from the digital interface with the store management and help locate the relevant items. Externally, the IT consultant has developed a CRM cloud-based interface to help both customer and employees conduct transactions and electronic payment online.
Within a year of outsourcing the digital strategy, CB has failed and lost 90% of their customers in addition to making 60% of their staff redundant. Clearly, there was a misalignment between the business strategy and the IT strategy.
Peter Craven, the owner of this company, needs your help as a professional information management consultant. He wants to define the areas of misalignments and explore different possibilities of developing a more relevant IT portfolio. These possibilities might include CRM, ERP, and Open Source Software to save the business and fix the fragmentation in his business processes. Therefore, you are required to submit a professional report that can be read and understood by Peter Craven and his fellow team.
You are anOIM consultant who has been employed to advise Craven Books on the effective implementation of these strategic changes. You are required to produce the following:
Part A: Analysis – Business Process Models and strategy analysis
In this section you should develop
Part B: Open Source Software Comparison Table
In this section you should conduct research into a suitable software solution for Craven Books. You should decide on the set of characteristics which you will use to evaluate the software and your research should consider 4-5 alternatives in detail. This section should be presented as a table.
Part C: Report
In this section you should write a report which provides an overview of the current situation together with a roadmap outlining how the proposed changes to the business can be achieved to the benefit of the business. This should draw on your analysis in Part A, include your recommendation for software, and provide recommendations for ensuring that the strategy is effectively implemented, including consideration of the challenges ahead.
This section should follow standard report structure:
Title Page – Contents – Introduction – Main Section – Conclusions and Recommendations – References.
Part D: Reflection on your contribution to the online discussion and wiki
In this section you should submit a 250 word reflective summary, accompanied by your own self-assessment of your contribution to the online elements throughout the module, using the table labelled Reflection Self Assessment Proforma in Appendix A (copy and paste it into your assignment document). The reflective report should include your detailed reflection, supported with evidence from the online discussion.
You should use appropriate theories, frameworks, models, that we have covered in the module, to inform and justify your recommendations.
The OnlineCampus module site has been set up with discussion boards(e.g. Units 4, 5, 6) for you to explore the assignment. It is recommended that you use these to:
Please don’t be shy in using the discussion board– the purpose is to give you experience of using collaborative technologies.
Appendix A: Reflection Self Assessment Proforma
Example (Fictional student and subject) Before I started researching the subject of open source, I assumed that support was not available for small businesses (see A Student’s posting “No support available” of 16 Oct). In writing my report I realised that there are a variety of models of support ( see my posting of 19 Oct).
|Quality of contributions||Made several good contributions and one or more outstanding contribution.||Made several good contributions.||Made a few good contributions||Made a few valid contributions||Made 1 or 2 postings, of poor quality||Did not contribute.|
|Attribution of references||Clear referencing of well-chosen and highly relevant sources||Clear referencing of all sources, some relevant..||Clear referencing of all sources.||Sources generally referenced.||Used ideas/ words of others without attribution.||Cut and paste or absent contributions.|
|Evidence of collaboration/ facilitation skills||Skill shown in weaving contributions into the discussions and wiki, and following up on contributions of others.||Skill shown in weaving contributions into discussion and / or wiki, or following up on contributions of others||Some evidence of links to contributions of others.||Basic recognition of contributions of others.||Little or no recognition of contributions of others.||None|
|Reflection on onlinecontributions (in reflective summary)||Deep reflection shown, with clear and substantial evidence from online discussion and wiki||Good reflection, with clear evidence from online discussion and / or wiki||Reflection and evidence offered, limitations in one of these||Reflection and evidence offered, limitations in both of these||Superficial reflection, very limited evidence||Very little or no reflection/evidence.|
Criterion / Mark range
(indicative – not for grading)
|Standard comparable to journal publication||Standard comparable to conference paper publication||Distinctive work for Masters level||Merit work for Masters level||Acceptable for Masters||Below Masters pass standard||Significantly below Masters pass standard|
|Scope||Outstanding clarity of focus, includes what is important, and excludes irrelevant issues.||Excellent clarity of focus, boundaries set with no significant omissions or unnecessary issues.||Clear focus. Very good setting of boundaries, includes most of what is relevant.||Clear scope and focus, with some omissions or unnecessary issues.||Scope evident and satisfactory but with some omissions and unnecessary issues.||Poorly scoped, with significant omissions and unnecessary issues.||Little or no scope or focus evident.|
Understanding of subject matter
|Outstanding with critical awareness of relevance of issues. Outstanding expression of ideas.||Excellent with critical awareness of relevance of issues. Excellent expression of ideas.||Very good with critical awareness of relevance of issues. Outstanding expression of ideas.||Good with some awareness of relevance of issues. Ideas are expressed, with some limitation.||Basic with limited awareness of relevance of issues. Limited expression of ideas.||Poor with little awareness of relevance of issues||Little or no understanding of subject matter is demonstrated.|
|Comprehensive literature review. Evaluation and synthesis of source material to produce an outstanding contribution.||Excellent independent secondary research. Sources are evaluated and synthesized to produce an excellent contribution.||Very good independent secondary research. Sources are evaluated and synthesized to produce a very good contribution.||Good secondary research to extend taught materials. Evidence of evaluation of sources, with some deficiencies in choice and synthesis.||Limited secondary research to extend taught materials. Limited evaluation of sources, deficiencies in choice and synthesis.||Little or no extension of taught materials. Poor choice and synthesis of materials.||Poor use of taught materials. No synthesis.|
|Critical analysis based on evidence||Standard of critical analysis – showing questioning of sources, understanding of bias, independence of thought||Excellent standard of critical analysis – excellence in questioning of sources, understanding of bias, independence of thought||A very good standard of critical analysis. Sources are questioned appropriately, and a very good understanding of bias, showing independence of thought||Critical analysis with some questioning of sources, understanding of bias, independence of thought.||Analysis evident but uncritical. Sources are not always questioned, with limited independence of thought.||Little or no analysis.||No valid analysis.|
|Structure of argument, leading to conclusion||Well structured, compelling and persuasive argument that leads to a valuable contribution to the field of study, paving the way for future work.||Argument has excellent structure and persuasiveness, leading to very significant insights and relevant future work.||Well-structured and persuasive argument Insightful conclusion draws together key issues and possible future work.||Structured and fairly convincing argument leads to conclusion that summarises key issues.||Argument has some structure and development towards conclusion with limitations in summary of issues.||Argument is unstructured, no recognizable conclusion.||No evidence of argument or conclusion.|
CRM: Customer Relationship Management