2018-2019
Global Strategic Operations, Markets and Resources
7LO517
Assessment for Autumn 2018
Coursework 1 – (40% of your Grade) – a maximum of 2000 words
Context
The need to continually review and attempt to improve the performance of business operations is a necessity to sustain short and long term success (Slack, 2008) regarding financial performance, customer retention and customer satisfaction. Arguably this is especially relevant in the context of goods and services provided to customers and consumers through the constantly evolving retail channels. This is demonstrated by the rising customer expectation with regard to procurement and delivery of goods and the subsequent emergence of Omni Channel Logistics (customer viewed as one entity across all retail channels, i.e., on-line, shop, phone), highlighting how organisations working within supply chain sectors are having to improve their operations for business sustainability. For example, according to renowned sector analysts IMRG & Blackbay (2014), failure of first time delivery could have potentially cost e-retailers in the region of £771 million during 2014.
The Challenge
You are a new 3PL (3RD party logistics) company that is offering a service that will give competitive advantage to a retail organisation. Through research you will identify current challenges associated with operationalising the supply chain management of home delivery, with depth and focus on one particular area you think important and that will give the retail organisation competitive advantage.
You are to produce an Individual Management Report which investigates the following:
1. Identification of a specific area of the supply chain where your organisation can leverage competitive advantage in making home delivery more cost effective and offers improved levels of customer service. You must give rationale for choosing the area which is supported by sound research. (25% of Marks)
2. You are to develop an operational strategy for sustained business success in the area above. The operational strategy will have sound rationale and you will be expected to discuss and critically evaluate relevant operations management theory\research and to justify its application to the specific context of your chosen area.
These could include, but not limited to topics such as:
Service/Process design
Process flow
Capacity Planning
Technology and Innovation
Here are some useful questions that you may consider:
How would process design give you competitive advantage?
What considerations/options should be built into the design of the services/processes?
What is the methodology for sustaining an efficient and relevant operation?
Note – these are indicative areas. Your work should demonstrate wide reading of the Operations subject area and appropriate application of the theory\research to your specific area. Your progress and thoughts towards CW1 will be discussed face to face with your tutor during the module (75% of Marks).
Coursework 2 – (60% of your Grade) – a maximum of 2500 words
As discussed in CW1, the emergence of Omni Channel concepts are causing businesses to re-think both business and marketing operations and strategies.
For a new to market product of your choice, you are to write an Individual Management Report which discusses and identifies Omni Channel Marketing Aspects, your report will cover the following criteria:
a) Develop your idea and compile the main components of a well-researched marketing strategy that could be used for sustained success of the product (50% of marks)
b) Give a critical assessment of how the complexities of the external environment and economic conditions will impact on Marketing and Operational Planning for the product. (25% of marks)
c) Propose and Justify suitable methods and techniques for sustaining business operations and customer value. Suggest relevant measures and approaches to managing performance, quality and process\systems improvement. (25% of marks)
For Both Assignments:
Format. You are required to use Harvard Referencing System for your work and keep to the word limit.
Criteria.
Please use an appropriate professional format that combines critical evaluation in a business report style underpinned by academic arguments, models, supports and references. Whilst the use of web sites is acceptable, please remember that this is an academic piece of work in an applied context. The majority of your work should be from text books, company reports, and Journal articles.
Submission Date for Both CW1 and CW2 to UDO/Turnitin: 11.59 am latest Jan 4th 2019
Assessment Grading
Overleaf are the grade descriptors with broad indicators of where grades may sit.
% mark Grade Descriptors These are typical characteristics of the quality of work associated with each grade. The descriptors are illustrative only and for guidance only. They are not comprehensive, and will need contextualisation within individual courses to reflect the academic discipline concerned. Category 90-100%
Excellent
Meets all criteria in 80-89% range below, plus demonstrates exceptional ability and insight, indicating the highest level of technical competence; work is virtually flawless and has potential to influence the forefront of the subject and may be of publishable/exhibitable quality. Relevant generic skills are demonstrated at the highest possible standard.
Exceptional achievement distinguishable even amongst the best quality work and deserving of the highest possible marks within the Distinction grade.
Distinction 80-89%
Excellent
High to very high standard work with most of the following features: authoritative subject knowledge; a high level of critical analysis and evaluation; incisive original thinking; commendable originality; exceptionally well researched, with a very high level of technical competence; high quality presentation; impressive clarity of ideas; excellent coherence and logic. Work is close to the forefront of the subject and may be close to publishable or exhibitable quality. Relevant generic skills are demonstrated at a very high level. Referencing is consistently used, complete and accurate. Only trivial or very minor errors.
Very high quality work worthy of a high Distinction grade mark.
Distinction 70-79%
Excellent
Authoritative, current subject knowledge; excellent critical analysis and evaluation – including dealing with ambiguity in the data; significant originality; well researched with a high level of technical competence – work is accurate and extensively supported by appropriate evidence; excellent presentation; commendable clarity of ideas; thoughtful and effective presentation; very strong sense of coherence and logic; relevant generic skills are demonstrated at a high level; referencing is excellent– consistently used, complete and accurate; a small number of misunderstandings/minor errors only.
High quality work deserving of a Distinction grade.
Distinction 60-69%
Very good
Work is well-developed and coherent; demonstrates sound, current subject knowledge; a very good level of critical analysis and evaluation; some evidence of original thinking or originality; well researched; no significant errors in the application of concepts or appropriate techniques; a very good standard of presentation; ideas generally clear and coherent; relevant generic skills are demonstrated at a very good level; referencing is very good; minor errors and misunderstandings only, possibly with some deficiencies in presentation.
Well above pass standard and worthy of a Merit grade.
Merit
50-59%
Good/Satisfactory
Has achieved intended learning outcomes as evidenced by the following features. Satisfactory subject knowledge; a fair level of critical analysis and evaluation; the work is generally sound but tends towards the factual or derivative, and there may be minimal evidence of original thinking or originality; adequately researched; a sound standard of presentation; ideas fairly clear and coherent; some significant errors and misunderstandings, possibly shown by conceptual gaps or limited use of appropriate techniques; relevant generic skills are generally at a satisfactory level; referencing is generally accurate; some weakness in style or presentation.
Satisfactory overall – a clear pass
Pass 40-49%
Unsatisfactory
Has narrowly failed to achieve intended learning outcomes as evidenced by the following features. Satisfactory subject knowledge to some extent; some sound aspects but some of the following weaknesses are evident: factual errors; conceptual gaps; inadequate critical analysis and evaluation; little evidence of originality; not well researched – limited use of appropriate techniques; presentation does not meet the standard required; ideas unclear and/or incoherent; some significant errors and misunderstandings; relevant generic skills unsatisfactory to some extent; referencing may be inadequate.
Work is unsatisfactory but shows potential for achieving learning outcomes if feedback is addressed. – Marginal fail
Marginal Fail 5-39%
Very Poor
Has failed to achieve intended learning outcomes in several critical respects. Will have some or all of the following features to varying extent: inadequate subject knowledge; factual errors; conceptual gaps; minimal/no awareness of relevant issues and theory; limited/no use of appropriate techniques; standard of presentation unacceptable; ideas confused and/or incoherent – work lacks sound development; a poor critical analysis and evaluation; no evidence of originality; inadequately researched; some serious misunderstandings and errors; quality of relevant generic skills does not meet the requirements of the task.
A clear fail well short of the pass standard
Fail 1-4%
Nothing of Merit
Nothing of value is contained in the submitted work. The work presents information that is irrelevant and unconnected to the task; no evident awareness of appropriate principles, theories, evidence or techniques
NS
Non-submission
No work has been submitted.
Z
Academic offence notation
Applies to proven instances of academic offence.