Business Process Improvement Reflection

PROJ 6009 Assessment 1 Brief Nov 2019 Page 1 of 7

ASSESSMENT BRIEF - 2

Subject Code and Title PROJ6009 Business Process Management and Systems

Assessment Assessment 2: Business Process Improvement Reflection (2 parts)

 Part A: Presentation: Comments on Best Practice of BPI Case study

 Part B: Reflection Report: Best Practice of BPI case study (Incorporating the feedback from the cohort)

Individual/Group Individual and/or Group for both Online and Face-to-Face delivery

Words limits Part A: 8-10 minutes (Group presentation)

Part B: 1000 words (Individual reflection report)

Learning Outcomes 1. Critically analyse the role of management information systems in sustaining successful organisations.

2. Critically evaluate approaches to business process management and systems, their associated risks and implementation processes.

3. Establish and justify governance processes for business process management change to ensure that all stakeholders are considered in technology change decisions

Submission Part A: By 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Sunday end of Module 4

Part B: By 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Sunday end of Week 11

(First half of Module 6)

Weighting 40% (Part A: 20%; Part B: 20%)

Total Marks 40 (20 marks for each part)

Context:

This assessment is to evaluate students’ critical thinking and analytical skills, as well as public speaking

and personal reflection. The assessment requests students to deliver a presentation in class or via a

teleconference, and provide a commentary on a selected Business Process Improvement (BPI) case

study. Feedback from the cohort must be collected, analysed and incorporated in the personal

reflection report, which is the second part of the assessment.

PROJ 6009 Assessment 1 Brief Nov 2019 Page 2 of 7

Instructions:

In this assessment, the students will begin with reading a selective case study of Business Process

Improvement practice, which is issued during Module 3 study. This assessment contains TWO parts.

To prepare for this assessment:

Part A: Presentation: Comments on Best Practice of BPI Case study

 Review Modules 1, 2, 3 and 4;

 In a team of 4 people, intensively read the case study and conduct extra research when

necessary;

 Coordinate with team members to design, prepare and rehearse the presentation;

Output:

 Maximum 10 slides (Excluding references and appendices), 8 -10 mins presentation delivered

in class;

 Online presentations could be delivered via teleconference (Zoom or Skype); Upload on the

Youtube as an unlisted video is an option with lecturer’s consultation and permission;

 Critical analysis and evaluation on the BPI practice of the case study;

 All team members should be presenting and sharing the workload equally;

 Actively listen and provide feedback on other teams’ presentation.

 Marks criteria and feedback form will be used to assess the presentation.

Part B: Business Process Improvement Report

 Review All modules;

 Familiarise with reflection report writing style.

In continuum of Part A, students are required to compile a personal reflection report. The report should

incorporate the feedback from cohort on Part A presentation, and personal learning journey through this

subject.

Output:

The BPI Reflection report should cover:

 Brief description of the case study and comments from Part A;

 Review and Analysis on the feedback from the cohort;

 Individual learning journey through the subject. Can follow “Before, During, After” or “What, So

What, Now What” format;

 Other personal thinking and feeling.

PROJ 6009 Assessment 1 Brief Nov 2019 Page 3 of 7

Learning Rubrics – Assessment 1 Part A: Business Process Improvement Presentation

Assessment Attributes

Fail (0-49)

Pass (50-64)

Credit (65-74)

Distinction (75-84)

High Distinction (85-100)

Presentation Contents and Structure 50%

Limited amount of information obtained from the case study; No data used to support the commentary; No analysis, justification or evaluation presented; No logical connection of BPM and BPI knowledge and tools in the presentation; Poor presentation structure or organisation

Reasonable amount of information obtained from the case study; Some data used to support the commentary; Limited analysis and evaluation presented; Limited connection of BPM and BPI knowledge and tools in the presentation; Acceptable organisation of the contents and structure.

Good amount of information obtained from the case study; Reasonable data used to support the commentary; Good analysis and evaluation presented; Good connection of BPM and BPI knowledge and tools in the presentation; Well structured contents, easy to follow; Good opening, topics and opinions stated with a conclusive ending;

Accurate information obtained from the case study; Specific and appropriate data and evidence used to support the commentary; Comprehensive analysis, critique, justification and evaluation presented Strong connection and utilisation of BPM and BPI knowledge and tools in the presentation; Clearly structured contents, using agenda, heading, easy to follow; Strong opening, clear topics and opinions stated with a conclusive ending; Extra research conducted and demonstrated through valid sources.

Solid and accurate information obtained from the case study; Specific and appropriate data and evidence used to support the commentary; Comprehensive and in-depth analysis, critique and justification presented with none-bias evaluation; Strong connection and utilisation of BPM and BPI knowledge and tools in the presentation; Clearly structured contents, using agenda, heading, sub-headings, easy to follow; Strong opening, clear topics and opinions stated with a conclusive ending; Extra research conducted and demonstrated through valid sources.

PROJ 6009 Assessment 1 Brief Nov 2019 Page 4 of 7

Presentation delivery and Q&A 30%

Presentation was incomplete and no connection with audiences; Contents are patricianly delivered, key parts are missed; Limited language used, verbal communication lack of coherent; NO visual aids use; NO answers to questions.

Presentation was completed and some connection with audiences; Contents are patricianly delivered, some missing parts; Use simple and straightforward language; Basic visual aids use, not fully support the presentation; Limited answers to questions, with incorrect information.

Smooth presentation and some connection with audiences; Contents are delivered in a logical and sensible manner; Use understandable and straightforward language; Use visual aids to support delivery; Partially answered questions nicely, provide reasonable explanation

Presenters demonstrated good confidence and connection with audiences, including body languages and eye contact; Contents are delivered in a logical cohesive, and sensible manner; Use engaging, professional and straightforward language; Use various types of visual aids to support delivery, incorporating with available technologies. Handled questions nicely, provide simple and good explanation.

Presenters demonstrated a great deal of confidence and strong connection with audiences, including body languages and eye contact; Contents are delivered in a logical cohesive, and sensible manner; Use engaging, professional and straightforward language, well explained on technical terminologies; Appropriately use various types of visual aids to support delivery, incorporating with available technologies. Handle questions with confidence, provide simple and proper answers with justification

Constructive feedback to peers 20%

No useful feedback provided Limited support and encouragement demonstrated; Lack of awareness of and sensitivity to diversity amongst peers

Offers some feedback, not specific or constructive; No articulation between contents and BPI; random comments Basic support and encouragement demonstrated; Lack of awareness of and sensitivity to diversity amongst peers

Offers some constructive feedback, specific and appropriate; Reasonable articulation between contents and BPI; Feedback communicated to peers with support and encouraging manner Demonstrates some awareness of and sensitivity to diversity amongst peers

Offers detailed constructive feedback, specific and appropriate; Articulated the presentation contents and BPI, effectively communicates them to peers; Provides good assistance, support, and encouragement to peers; Demonstrates a good level of awareness of and sensitivity to diversity amongst peers.

Actively offers detailed constructive feedback, specific and appropriate; Expertly articulated the presentation contents and BPI, effectively communicates them to peers. Provides excellent assistance, support, and encouragement to peers. Consistently demonstrates a high level of awareness of and sensitivity to diversity amongst peers.

PROJ 6009 Assessment 1 Brief Nov 2019 Page 5 of 7

Learning Rubrics – Assessment 1 Part B: Business Process Improvement Reflection Report

Assessment Attributes

Fail (0-49)

Pass (50-64)

Credit (65-74)

Distinction (75-84)

High Distinction (85-100)

Description of case study and key elements of commentary. 20%

NO description of the case study; Limited information provided from the commentary on BPI practice; NO evidence presented.

Brief description of the case study, covered some key elements; Some information provided from the commentary on BPI practice; Limited evidence presented.

Good description of the case study, covered some key elements; Highlight the outcomes of BPI on organisation; Reasonable amount of information provided from the commentary on BPI practice; Limited theoretical and/or practical evidence presented

Well crafted description of the case study, covered all elements in brief and professional language. Highlight the outcomes and the impacts of BPI on organisation; Logical and key information provided from the commentary on BPI practice; Some theoretical and/or practical evidence presented as justification to support the evaluation;

Excellent and concise description of the case study, covered all elements in brief and professional language. Discuss the outcomes and the impacts of BPI on organisation from both positive and negative aspects; Logical and core information provided from the commentary on BPI practice; Relevant theoretical and/or practical evidence presented as justification to support the evaluation;

Review and Analysis on the feedback from the cohort 20%

Mentioned constructive feedback from the cohort, NO review or analysis NO discussion on how the feedback will benefit future performance.

Highlighted constructive feedback from the cohort, Review the contents roughly; Mentioned feedback into reflection report, limited discussion on how the feedback will benefit future performance.

List a few constructive feedback from the cohort, Review the contents, categorised them according to BPI commentary and presentation; Mentioned feedback into reflection report, some discussion on how the feedback will benefit future performance.

List some constructive feedback from the cohort, including critiques Review and analysis the contents, categorised them according to BPI commentary and presentation; Incorporated feedback into reflection report, discussion on how the feedback will benefit future performance.

List all constructive feedback from the cohort, including critiques Review and thorough analysis the contents, clearly categorised them according to BPI commentary and presentation; Incorporated feedback into reflection report, detailed discussion on how the feedback will benefit future performance.

PROJ 6009 Assessment 1 Brief Nov 2019 Page 6 of 7

Personal learning Reflection: Key knowledge and skills learned from this subject. Lesson learnt and benefits for future study and career. 50%

Limited understanding of Integrated project management, plan, processes, life cycle and/or enterprise environment factors. No personal reflection

Knowledge or understanding of Integrated project management, plan, processes, life cycle and/or enterprise environment factors. Often conflates /confuses assertion of personal opinion with information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials. Some attempt at self- criticism, but fails to demonstrate awareness of personal biases, stereotypes or preconceptions. No attempt at asking probing questions about self.

Thorough knowledge or understanding of Integrated project management, plan, processes, life cycle and/or enterprise environment factors. Supports personal opinion and information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials. Realise and reflect to personal study and career benefits from the learning. Some attempt at self- criticism, but fails to demonstrate awareness of personal biases, stereotypes or preconceptions. Asks some probing questions about self, but do not attempt to answer these.

Highly developed understanding of Integrated project management, plan, processes, life cycle and/or enterprise environment factors. Discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading. Well demonstrated capacity to explain and apply tools or techniques for future study and career Demonstrates the ability to question own biases, stereotypes, preconceptions but new modes of thinking is not evident. Risks asking probing questions about self but only attempts to answer these sometimes.

A sophisticated understanding of Integrated project management, plan, processes, life cycle and/or enterprise environment factors. Systematically and critically discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading. Expertly articulates, justifies and apply tools or techniques for future study and career. Well structured report follow reflection frameworks Demonstrates the ability to question own biases, stereotypes, preconceptions and define new modes of thinking as a result. Risks asking probing questions about self and attempts to answer these.

Use of academic and discipline conventions and sources of evidence 10%

Poorly written with errors in spelling, grammar. Demonstrates inconsistent use of good quality, credible and

Is written according to academic genre (e.g. with introduction, conclusion or summary) and has accurate spelling, grammar, sentence and paragraph construction.

Is well-written and adheres to the academic genre (e.g. with introduction, conclusion or summary). Demonstrates consistent use of high quality, credible and relevant research sources to

Is very well-written and adheres to the academic genre. Consistently demonstrates expert use of good quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop appropriate arguments and statements. Shows evidence of

Expertly written and adheres to the academic genre. Demonstrates expert use of high- quality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop arguments and position statements. Shows extensive

PROJ 6009 Assessment 1 Brief Nov 2019 Page 7 of 7

relevant research sources to support and develop ideas. No justification provided on the connection between references and assessment contents. There are mistakes in using the APA style.

Demonstrates consistent use of credible and relevant research sources to support and develop ideas, but these are not always explicit or well developed. Some justification provided on the connection between references and assessment contents. There are no mistakes in using the APA style.

support and develop ideas. Well justified the linkage and connection between references and assessment contents. There are no mistakes in using the APA style.

reading beyond the key reading. Excellent justification provided on the linkage and connection between references and assessment contents. There are no mistakes in using the APA style.

evidence of reading beyond the key reading. Expertly justified the connection and validation between references and assessment contents. There are no mistakes in using the APA Style.