PROCUREMENT AND SUPPLY MANAGEMENT

1

ASSIGNMENT – PROCUREMENT AND SUPPLY MANAGEMENT

Module Code & Cohort PSB271EKM (PT)- Dated April 2018

Coursework Type Individual written report

% of Module Mark 100%

Module T itle Procurement and Supply Management

Module Leader Dr. John Heng

Submission Date Individual written Report: 30 Jun 2018

Module Learning Outcomes Assessed

1. Appraise the linkages between business strategy and procurement and supply strategy. 2. Critically evaluate how procurement and supply management can contribute to competitive advantage. 3. Apply procurement and supply management theory, concepts and models to the analysis of case studies of sufficient complexity to require judgment and synthesis. 4. Evaluate critically current research and advanced scholarship in a specified area of procurement and supply management leading to a demonstration of independent learning and an advancement of individual knowledge. 5. Assess and evaluate advanced concepts and future trends in procurement and supply management.

2

TASK and MARK DISTRIBUTION

1. The assessed coursework for this module comprises only One Assignment.

2. Assignment:

Individual Written Report - 100% of module mark You are to submit an individual report based on a company of your choice, identifying two supply chain management issues and analysing their impact on the company’s business performance. Critically appraise how procurement and supply management can contribute to improvement in business performance and competitive advantage including the drivers for change; assess and evaluate advanced concepts and future trends in SCM that would facilitate this.

The report should consist of the following main sections:

• Introduction

• Discussion & Analysis

• Recommendation, if any

• Conclusion

• References The report, of not more than 3,500 words (+/- 10%), should be typewritten in Times New Roman, font size 12 and double-spaced with page numbers.

4. To pass this module you must achieve a module mark of at least 40%.

5. Each assignment part will be assessed against the criteria for comprehension, effort and presentation

given below.

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

Comprehension: interpretation of assignment, understanding of the subject matter, identification of issues, subject relevance, insight & originality, factual content, depth and rigour of analysis, literature review, linking theory to sources, theoretical relevance and explanation, linking theory to practice, use of models and diagrams, constructive critical evaluation and analysis, rigour of key learning points, linking of key learning points to prior analysis, recommendations for future improvement

60%

Effort: planning, preparation and coordination, use of examples, citing of quality references, coherence, evidence of independent research and learning, questions during presentations, appropriate length

20%

Presentation: introduction, readability, English clarity, engagement, presentation quality, logical structure, signposting, quality of content, reference list, presentation of references, timing of presentation, grammar, syntax, spelling, legibility, content sheet, page numbering

20%

3

FEEDBACK RUBRIC:

CRITERIA

0-39%

Fail

40-49%

Barely Meets Criteria

50-59% Satisfactorily

Meets Criteria

60-70% Meets

Criteria Well

70-100%

Fully Meets or Exceeds Criteria

Compreh ension

Little or no evidence of own research, analysis, critical discussion or theoretical engagement. At the lower end, the submission lacks comprehension, or fails to answer the question, resulting in an assignment that fails to demonstrate adequate understanding of the subject and which lies below the required standard

Descriptive with minimal evidence of own research and analysis. Limited critical discussion or theoretical engagement.

Weak arguments link theory to practice. Limited use of relevant quality sources and few or poorly argued recommendations for future improvement

Some evidence of own research and analysis with critical discussion and linking of theory to practice. The arguments are not always convincing, and the work is descriptive in places. There is some use of relevant quality sources and recommendations for future improvement

Good evidence of own research and analysis with a clear line of critical and evaluative argument. Good linking of theory to practice and a good range of relevant quality sources is used. Well argued recommendations for future improvement

Demonstrates mastery of the subject with excellent conceptual and practical understanding. Presents a clear, consistent in-depth critical and evaluative argument, displaying the ability to develop original ideas from a range of sources. Evidences clear linking of theory to practice through deep engagement with theoretical and conceptual critical analysis. Supported by citations from an excellent range of high quality sources with soundly argued recommendations for future improvement

Effort

Little evidence of relevant reading, research or independent learning. At the lower end, very limited use and application of high quality sources as supporting evidence. Little relevant citing and referencing or use of examples. Weak questioning of other groups.

Some evidence of relevant reading, research and independent learning with a limited range of high quality sources. Some relevant citing and referencing and use of examples. Some relevant questioning of other groups.

Good evidence of relevant reading, research and independent learning supported by a satisfactory range of high quality sources. Satisfactory citing and referencing and use of examples. Some good questioning of other groups.

Well planned and organised with very good evidence of relevant reading, research and independent learning supported by a good range of high quality sources. Good citing and referencing and use of examples. Some deep questioning of other groups.

Excellent planning and organisation providing excellent evidence of relevant reading, research and independent learning. A wide range of appropriate supporting evidence is provided from high quality sources. Excellent citing and referencing and use of examples. Deep questioning of other groups.

Presenta tion

Weak structure, content and presentation quality. At the lower end, there is poor grammar and/or spelling and diagrams, contents sheet, page numbering, citations and reference list are poorly presented or incomplete

Overall structure lacks balance or fails to fully integrate all of the material. Grammar and/or spelling and diagrams, contents sheet, page numbering, citing and references may contain errors or show inconsistency

Satisfactory structure using headings and sub-sections that show the development of logical arguments. Diagrams, tables and references are adequately titled, cited and presented, with few errors.

Well structured and organised with good use of headings and sub- sections that support the development of sound logical arguments. Diagrams, tables and references are all well titled, cited and presented

Excellent structure, content and presentational quality. Clearly written, demonstrating the ability to communicate ideas concisely and effectively. Diagrams, tables and references are all properly titled, cited and presented