one major problem in organization

Page | 1 Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College 55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: 02-9318 8111 PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D Approved: 13th February 2019 & Version 1

Unit Code and Title: SBM4203 Management Information Systems

Assessment 2: Critical Review

Due date: Week 6

Group/individual: Group

Word count / Time provided: 2000 words

Weighting: 40%

Unit Learning Outcomes: ULO-2, ULO-3

Course Learning Outcomes: CLO-1, CLO-2, CLO-6, CLO-8

Graduate Attributes: GA09, GA10

Marking Information: The Critical Review will be marked out of 100 and will be weighted 40% of the

total unit mark.

Assessment Details:

This Assignment assesses the student’s understanding of the theoretical learning to practical, real

world situations.

Students should identify a problem situation (only one problem) in an organisation they have

access to (preferably an organisation where you work or have worked recently). Do not focus on a

problem that has already been solved. Also do not focus on many problems at the same time.

A presentation covering the following points should be prepared:

1. A brief introduction of the organisation (it is acceptable to withhold the name of the organisation).

2. Description of the problem, as much as possible in terms of the observable or measurable symptoms it manifests, for example: increased customer complaints; specific quality concerns; high staff turnover; contracts lost; decreased market share; loss of funding or loss of profit. (Do not conceptualise the problem initially as ‘a leadership problem’, ‘a communication problem’ etc.).

3. The issue/problem that should then be considered and analysed in terms of material drawn from any two topics studied as part of this subject. To give some examples, your group may choose to apply a model of leadership and use strategic planning concepts to examine your problem, or use models or concepts of motivation and organisational culture, or ethics and organisational design. Try to choose the topic models/concepts that seem to offer the most useful insights into the problem. Do not try to deal with many models or concepts. For example, two models, well applied and showing a good understanding of associated concepts would likely to give optimum results. Topics outside course coverage should not be selected.

4. Design of an intervention (a change program or set of activities and procedures) utilising some aspect or aspects of your analysis. The intervention should be intended to solve or improve the situation. Please note you are not merely being asked for a list of recommendations. If you intend to

Assessment Details

Page | 2 Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College 55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: 02-9318 8111 PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D Approved: 13th February 2019 & Version 1

undertake any research, interviewing, distribution of questionnaires or other activities in your organisation, you must discuss your proposed approach with your lecturer and obtain your lecturer’s approval before you do so. Your lecturer will discuss approach with you prior to actual presentation date. You should present your considerations, analysis and intervention design to the class at their scheduled time. The schedule for presenting will be negotiated in class. The presentation should last not more than 15 minutes. You will be penalised for exceeding 15 minutes. An additional 5 minutes is available for class discussion (questions and answers). Support your presentation with appropriate visuals such as computer slides and handouts. A report of 1200 to 1500 words summarising your presentation must be submitted on the due date. Visual material used in the presentation may be included as an appendix if you wish. Your report must have a cover page duly completed and signed, and it has to be fully referenced.

Marking Criteria and Rubric: The assessment will be marked out of 100 and will be

weighted 40% of the total unit mark

Marking Criteria

Not satisfactory

(0-49%) of the criterion mark)

Satisfactory

(50-64%) of the criterion mark

Good

(65-74%) of the criterion mark

Very Good

(75-84%) of the criterion mark

Excellent

(85-100%) of the criterion mark

Visual Appeal Presentation slides,

clarity, grammar, spelling and

engaging (10 marks)

Lack of evidence of written presentation skills (no visual appeal). The slides were difficult to read and too much information had been copied onto them. There are many errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation.

Evidence of basic skills of communicating (writing) in project environment. Minimal effort made to make slides appealing

Has given a factual and/or conceptual skill base in communication (writing) in project environment. There are some errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. In some slides, too much information on two or more slides. good visual appeal.

Has very good skills in communicating (writing) a project report There are few errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. very visual appeal.

Has excellent skills in communicating (writing) in project environment There are no errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. Information is clear and concise on each slide. Excellent visually appeal that is engaging.

Comprehension

General knowledge of the selected

project case (30 marks)

Lack of evidence of comprehensive knowledge in the topic. Majority of information irrelevant to the selected project case.

Evidence of basic knowledge in the topic. Basic information about the project background and lack of evidence of comprehensive knowledge in the project scope components

Has given a factual and/or conceptual knowledge to the case project, identifying project stakeholders and writing stakeholders register Good evidence of comprehensive knowledge in the project scope components

Reasonable knowledge of background of case project and very good level of awareness of project most of scope statement.

Extensive comprehension knowledge of topic. Members showed complete understanding of the sleeted project and project scope statement. Accurately answered all questions posed.

Content Understanding of

the selected project case and of the project scope components.

(40 mark)

Lack of evidence of adequate understanding of the selected project case. Majority of information irrelevant and significant points left out.

Evidence of basic knowledge and skills of developing project scope statement.

Has given a factual and/or conceptual knowledge and skills base in developing project scope statement and give a brief about the project background

Reasonable knowledge and skills of developing project scope statement. Some items are missing such assumptions, high level constraints, risks…etc.

Has excellent skills in developing project scope statement. The presentation was a concise summary of the selected project. All questions answered. Comprehensive and complete coverage of information.

Page | 3 Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College 55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: 02-9318 8111 PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D Approved: 13th February 2019 & Version 1

Presentation Skills Oral

communication skills in project environment

(10 mark)

Lack of evidence of minimal communication skills such as body language and eye contact. Minimal eye contact and focusing on small part of audience. The presenter did not get the audience engaged.

Evidence of basic communication skills. Minimal body language was used by the presenters. Minimal evidence of engaging the audience.

Evidence of good oral communication skills. some members spoke to majority of audience; steady eye contact. The audience was engaged by the presentation.

Most members spoke to majority of audience; very good body language, suitable volume speaking level, regular eye contact. The audience was engaged by the presentation.

Has excellent skills in oral communication. Excellent body language, speaking volume & regular eye contact. The audience was engaged, and presenters held the audience’s attention.

Group Dynamics Preparation, and

engaging (10 mark)

Unbalanced presentation or tension resulting from lack of group dynamics .

Evidence of group dynamics can be seen through handling the presentation among the group members. Most of the members were dependence on reading off slides.

Evidence of good group dynamics can be seen. Primarily prepared but with some dependence on just reading off slides.

Very good group dynamics was evident by handling the presentation by the members, Members helped each other. Very well prepared.

Significant group dynamics. All presenters participated equally and helped each other as needed. Very well prepared and rehearsed.