Logistics And Operations Management
AmazingExpert
coursework_assignment_brief.pdf
Page 1 of 5
Coursework Assignment Brief
Semester: C15 Summer 2015
Module Code: PM206
Module Title: Logistics and Operations Management
Programme BSc (Hons) Business Management BSc (Hons) Management with Human Resource Management BSc (Hons) Business Management & Information Technology BSc (Hons) Human Resource Management with Information Systems BSc (Hons) Computer Science with Information Systems BSc (Hons) Oil & Gas Management
Level: Level 5
Awarding Body: Plymouth University
Module Leader Jonathan Lawal
Format: Report
Presentation: No
Any special
requirements:
All work should be submitted on the Student Portal along
with a Turnitin Report
Word Limit: 2,000 words (with 10% plus or minus leeway)
Deadline date for
submission:
Tuesday 11th August 2015
Learning outcomes
to be examined in
this assessment
(please note that
this is NOT the
assessment task)
• Critically evaluate methods of planning and
organising efficient operations and networking.
• Analyse the problems of controlling component
activities and of controlling quality
• Critically discuss methods of project evaluation and
of scheduling resources
Page 2 of 5
Percentage of
marks awarded for
module:
This assignment is worth 50% of the total marks for the
module
Assessment
criteria
Explanatory comments on the
assessment criteria
Maximum marks
for each section
Content, style,
relevance,
originality
Clear demonstration of rigorous
research from recognised
authoritative sources. Audience
focus.
50%
Format,
referencing,
bibliography
Rigorous use of the Harvard
Methodology for citation and
referencing; page numbering; correct
display of direct quotations.
10 %
Constructive critical
analysis,
introduction,
conclusion
Demonstration of a clear
understanding of the issues. Use of
academic models.
40%
Assignment Task
As the Operations Manager for any of the listed companies below, you are tasked
with the decision to outsource part of their products or services for added value to
the customer.
Using the decision logic of outsourcing, provide a detailed Logic map to indicate
what should be outsourced and what is to be kept in-house.
Analyse the factors that influence your decision to outsource or to remain in-house
using the 5 Performance objectives.
Evaluate the risks involved in the process of decision making and recommend
mitigating strategies to the risks.
Chose any one of the companies below for your analysis
• Shell
• BP
• Starbucks
• Costa
Total marks for assignment: 100
Page 3 of 5
Page 4 of 5
Generic Criteria for Assessment at Level 5
Marks 0-25 (Fail) 26-39 (Fail) 40-49 (3 rd
) 50-59 (2.2) 60-69 (2.1) 70-85 (1 st
) 86-100 (1 st
)
Assessment categories
Knowledge & Understanding of Subject
Major gaps in knowledge and understanding of material at this level. Significant inaccuracies.
Gaps in knowledge and only superficial understanding of the well-established principles of area(s) of study. Some inaccuracies.
Threshold level. Some knowledge and understanding of material, of well- established principles of area(s) of study, and of the way in which those principles have been developed.
Broad knowledge and understanding of material, of well- established principles of area(s) of study, and of the way in which those principles have been developed.
Very good knowledge and understanding of material, of well- established principles of area(s) of study, and of the way in which those principles have been developed.
Very good, detailed knowledge and understanding of material, main concepts/theories at this level. Awareness of the limitation of their knowledge, and how this influences any analyses and interpretations based on that knowledge.
Exceptional knowledge and understanding of material, main concepts/theories at this level. Awareness of the limitation of their knowledge, and how this influences any analyses and interpretations based on that knowledge
Cognitive/ Intellectual Skills
(e.g. analysis and synthesis; logic and argument; analytical reflection; organisation and communication of ideas and evidence)
Unsubstantiated generalizations, made without use of any credible evidence. Lack of logic, leading to unsupportable conclusions or missing conclusions. Lack of analysis and relevance.
Views/ findings largely irrelevant, illogical or contradictory. Generalisations/ statements made with scant evidence. Conclusions lack relevance and/or validity.
Threshold level. Awareness of main issues. Structure of argument effective, but with some gaps or weaknesses. Some evidence provided to support findings, but not always consistent. Some relevant conclusions.
Issues identified and critically analysed within given areas. An awareness of different stances and ability to use evidence to support argument. Ability to apply concepts and principles outside context of study context. Generally sound conclusions.
Good level of analysis and synthesis. An awareness of different stances and ability to use evidence convincingly to support argument. Ability to apply concepts/ principles effectively beyond context of study. Valid conclusions.
Excellent analysis and synthesis. A range of perceptive points made within given area for this level of study. Arguments logically developed, supported by a range of relevant evidence. Explicit acknowledgement of other stances. Strong conclusions.
Exceptional analysis and synthesis are consistent features. Perceptive, logically connected points made throughout the work within an eloquent, balanced argument. Evidence selected judiciously and thoroughly analysed. Persuasive conclusions.
Use of Research- informed Literature (including referencing, appropriate academic conventions and academic honesty)
No evidence of reading. Views are unsupported and non- authoritative. Academic conventions largely ignored.
Evidence of little reading appropriate for this level and/or indiscriminate use of sources. Academic conventions used weakly.
Threshold level. Evidence of reading relevant sources, with some appropriate linking to given text(s). Academic conventions evident and largely consistent, with minor weaknesses.
Knowledge and analysis of a range of literature beyond core text(s). Literature used accurately and analytically. Academic skills generally sound.
Knowledge of the field of literature used consistently to support findings. Research-informed literature integrated into the work. Very good use of academic conventions.
Critical engagement with a range of reading. Knowledge of research-informed literature embedded in the work. Consistently accurate use of academic conventions.
Exceptionally wide range of relevant literature evaluated and used critically to inform argument, balance discussion and/or inform problem-solving. Consistently accurate and assured use of academic conventions.
Page 5 of 5
LEVEL 5 cont…
Graduate Skills for Life and Employment
(e.g. research- related skills; written, graphical and oral communication skills; group working; problem-solving; practical and professional skills)
Little or no evidence of the required skills in any of the areas identified for assessment at this level.
Limited evidence of skills in the range identified for assessment at this level. Significant weaknesses evident, which suggest that the candidate is not yet on course to gain skills necessary for graduate-level employment.
Research skills: Some evidence of ability to collect and interpret appropriate data/ information and undertake research tasks with limited external guidance. Can communicate in a range of formats, including orally, appropriate to the discipline(s), but with some weaknesses. Can work with others as a member of a group, meeting most obligations to others, modifying responses appropriately. Can identify key areas of problems and generally choose appropriate methods for their resolution. Able to recognise own strengths and weaknesses in relation to professional and practical skills, but with limited insight in some areas. .
Research skills: Can undertake research-like tasks, drawing on a range of sources, with limited external guidance. Can communicate effectively and confidently in a range of formats, including orally, appropriate to the discipline(s). Can work effectively with others as a member of a group, meeting obligations to others, modifying responses appropriately. Can identify key areas of problems and choose appropriate methods for their resolution in a considered manner. Able to evaluate own strengths and weaknesses in relation to professional and practical skills, and to develop own evaluation criteria.
Research skills: Can successfully complete research- like tasks, drawing on a range of sources, with limited external guidance. Can communicate well, confidently and consistently in a range of formats, including orally, appropriate to the discipline(s). Can work very effectively and confidently with others as a member of a group, meeting obligations to others, modifying responses appropriately. Can identify key areas of problems and choose, with autonomy, appropriate methods for their resolution in a considered manner. Able to take initiative in evaluating own strengths and weaknesses in relation to professional and practical skills identified by others and develop and effectively apply own evaluation criteria.
Research skills: Can successfully complete research- like tasks, drawing on a range of sources, with a significant degree of autonomy. Can communicate very effectively and confidently in a range of formats, including orally, appropriate to the discipline(s). Can work very effectively and confidently with others as a member of a group, showing leadership skills where appropriate, and meet all obligations to others. Can identify key areas of problems confidently and choose, with autonomy and notable effectiveness, appropriate methods for their resolution in a considered manner. Able to show insight and autonomy in evaluating own strengths and weaknesses re professional and practical skills, showing excellent judgement.
Research skills: Evidence of exceptional success in undertaking a range of research-like tasks with high degree of autonomy for the level. Can communicate highly effectively, with professionalism, in a range of formats, including orally, appropriate to the discipline(s). Can work exceptionally well with others as a key member of a group, showing leadership skills where appropriate, negotiating and meeting all obligations to others. Can identify key areas of problems confidently and choose, with autonomy and exceptional effectiveness, appropriate methods for their resolution in a considered manner. Able to show insight and autonomy in evaluating own strengths and weaknesses, showing
outstanding judgement.
Marks for Level 5 0-25 (Fail) 26-39 (Fail) 40-49 (3 rd
) 50-59 (2.2) 60-69 (2.1) 70-85 (1 st
) 86-100 (1 st
)
