PROJ 6009 Assessment 1 Brief July 2018 Page 1 of 10 ASSESSMENT BRIEF – 1 Subject Code and Title PROJ6009 Business Process Management and Systems Assessment Assessment 1: Business Process Development Plan (2 parts) ¦ Part A: Business Process Analytical Plan: As-Is & To-Be mapping. ¦ Part B: Business Process Improvement Report: Should-Be mapping & Performance evaluation Individual/Group Individual and/or in Pair for both Online and Face-to-Face delivery Words limits Part A: 1500 words per report Part B: 1500 words per 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 3 Part B: By 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Sunday end of Module 5 Weighting 60% (Part A: 30%; Part B: 30%) Total Marks 60 (30 marks for each part) Context: This assessment is evaluating students learning basics of business process management in organisations. The assessment requests students to develop a business process management plan for a particular case in an organisation, a department or a project environment. The plan incorporates identifying the existing (As-Is) situation of the processes of the case, and a few possible future states (To-Be) of these processes for improvement on efficiency and other benefits. In addition, the students need to develop an ideal processes (Should-Be) plan to best suit the organisation and the project. Furthermore, the students will provide a performance evaluation report based on the scenarios created in the Should-Be processes to complete this assessment. PROJ 6009 Assessment 1 Brief July 2018 Page 2 of 10 Instructions: In this assessment, the students will begin with identifying a process case in a professional working environment. The case can be from an organisation or a project the students participated in before. This assessment contains TWO parts. To prepare for this assessment: ¢ Review Modules 1, 2 and 3 for Part A; Module 4 and 5 for Part B; ¢ Identify a case from any industrial sector (production or service industry) you experienced. Part A: Business Process Analytical Plan Choose a realistic and detailed organisation or project, and analyse the Business Process Management (BPM) methods and techniques taught in the first three modules. Students are required to work on a process analytical plan (including As-Is and To-Be process mapping). In your analysis, consider and include the following: ¦ Critically analyse the role of business process management in your chosen case study ¦ Critically evaluate approaches to business process management and systems, their associated risked and implementation processes Output: The Business process analytical plan contains: ¦ Business or project process briefing ¦ Case based business or project process mappings (As-Is and To-Be) ¦ Critical analysis on two mappings where are applicable: Good Bad and Ugly; Costs and Benefits; Advantages and Disadvantages; Feasibility and Sensitivity etc. Part B: Business Process Improvement Report In continuum of Part A, students are required to compile a performance evaluation report, to demonstrate their understanding and knowledge developed from Module 4 and 5, by applying tools and techniques introduced in class activities and personal researches. The students should clarify the business or project constraints and assumptions to create a scenario, where can be For or Against the To-Be process. Output: The Business process improvement report should cover: ¦ Brief description of the scenario Audit process improvement methods chosen ¦ Evaluate and suggest whether the To-Be can be the Should Be ¦ Establish and justify governance processes for BPM change ¦ Describe how to better ensure that all stakeholders are considered in both process and technology change. PROJ 6009 Assessment 1 Brief July 2018 Page 3 of 10 Learning Rubrics Assessment 1 Part A: Business Process Analytical Plan (As-Is and To-Be Process Mapping) Assessment Attributes Fail (0-49) Pass (50-64) Credit (65-74) Distinction (75-84) High Distinction (85-100) Business or Project Process Briefing 20% Failed to write about business or project brief; NO business or project process information provided Business or project briefing is provided; Descriptions covered business or project background and other basic information; Good business or project briefing written in formal business language; Descriptions covered business or project background, sectors operated in, goals and objectives; Key processes or painpoints are clearly identified. Well written business or project briefing provided, using formal business language; Descriptions covered business or project background, sectors operated in, goals and objectives current issues experienced, challenges faced. Key processes or pain-points are clearly identified. Professionally written business or project briefing provided, using formal business language; Descriptions covered business or project background, sectors operated in, goals and objectives current issues experienced, challenges faced. Potential strategies to implement and risks associated with them. Key processes or pain-points are clearly identified. PROJ 6009 Assessment 1 Brief July 2018 Page 4 of 10 Assessment Attributes Fail (0-49) Pass (50-64) Credit (65-74) Distinction (75-84) High Distinction (85-100) Process Mapping: As-Is and To-Be 35% Fail to design process maps as per requirements, NO particular shapes, flows, symbols used; NO further evidence and justification provided to explain business or project processes; NO critical analysis with brief interpretation. Designed process maps as per requirements, used various shapes, flows, symbols; Both process mappings are supported without further explanation, or evidence and justification; Limited critical analysis with brief interpretation. Designed process maps as per requirements, used various shapes, flows, symbols and terminologies; Both process mappings are supported with a explanation, evidence and justification; Extra research conducted to complement course materials. Exercised critical analysis with brief interpretation. Nicely designed process maps, accurately utilised specific shapes, flows, symbols and terminologies; Well presented BOTH mappings supported with a explanation, evidence and justification; Capacity to explain and apply business process management concepts, their associated risks and implementation processes is supported by robust evidence from research/course materials. Questions viewpoints of business process management experts. Analysis and evaluation reflect growing judgement, rigor and adaptability. Professionally designed process maps, accurately utilised specific shapes, flows, symbols and terminologies; Well presented BOTH mappings supported with a detailed explanation, evidence and justification; Questions viewpoints of business process management experts and offers critical analysis of information taken from outside sources. Business process management information is taken from sources with a high level of interpretation/evaluation to develop a comprehensive critical analysis or synthesis. Exhibits intellectual independence, rigor, good judgement and adaptability. PROJ 6009 Assessment 1 Brief July 2018 Page 5 of 10 Assessment Attributes Fail (0-49) Pass (50-64) Credit (65-74) Distinction (75-84) High Distinction (85-100) Critically analysis on the process mapping 35% NO basic critical analysis techniques exercised No evaluation provided to comment on either mappings; NO evaluation criteria designed. Basic evaluation provided to comment on BOTH mappings; Briefly explained evaluation criteria. Various evaluation applied, including one of below Good, Bad and Ugly; Costs and Benefits; Advantages and Disadvantages; Feasibility and Sensitivity etc. Use basic critical analysis techniques, supported with detailed explanation; Evaluation provided to comment on BOTH mappings. Briefly explained evaluation criteria. Various evaluation applied, including some of below Good, Bad and Ugly; Costs and Benefits; Advantages and Disadvantages; Feasibility and Sensitivity etc. Well exercised on critical analysis techniques: broke down the complex processes into understandable steps, supported with detailed explanation; Good evaluation provided to comment on BOTH mappings. Evaluation criteria or matrix are presented and followed. Various evaluation applied, including one of below Good, Bad and Ugly; Costs and Benefits; Advantages and Disadvantages; Feasibility and Sensitivity etc. Some discussion questions prompt to encourage further discussion. Professionally exercised on critical analysis techniques: broke down the complex processes into understandable steps, supported with detailed explanation, evidence and validated external sources; Objective evaluation provided to comment on BOTH mappings with NO confirmation bias. Evaluation criteria or matrix are presented and followed. Various evaluation applied, including but not limited to Good, Bad and Ugly; Costs and Benefits; Advantages and Disadvantages; Feasibility and Sensitivity etc. Valuable discussion questions prompt to encourage further discussion. PROJ 6009 Assessment 1 Brief July 2018 Page 6 of 10 Assessment Attributes Fail (0-49) Pass (50-64) Credit (65-74) Distinction (75-84) High Distinction (85-100) 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 relevant research sources to support and develop ideas. There are mistakes in using the APA style. Is written according to academic genre (e.g. with introduction, conclusion or summary) and has accurate spelling, grammar, sentence and paragraph construction. Demonstrates consistent use of credible and relevant research sources to support and develop ideas, but these are not always explicit or well developed. There are no mistakes in using the APA style. 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 support and develop ideas. There are no mistakes in using the APA style. 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 reading beyond the key reading There are no mistakes in using the APA style. Expertly written and adheres to the academic genre. Demonstrates expert use of highquality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop arguments and position statements. Shows extensive evidence of reading beyond the key reading There are no mistakes in using the APA Style. PROJ 6009 Assessment 1 Brief July 2018 Page 7 of 10 Learning Rubrics Assessment 1 Part B: Business Process Improvement Report (Should Be Mapping and Performance Evaluation) Assessment Attributes Fail (0-49) Pass (50-64) Credit (65-74) Distinction (75-84) High Distinction (85-100) Evaluation of Business Process improvement 35% Confuses logic and emotion. Business process improvement information is taken from reliable sources but without a coherent analysis or synthesis. Lacks evidence from the view point of business process management experts. Resembles a recall or summary of business process improvement. Conflates/confuses assertion of personal opinion with business process improvement information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials. Attempts to synthesise citation from business process management sources. Viewpoints of business process management experts are taken as fact with little questioning. Supports personal opinion with evidence from reliable business process improvement sources. Demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply business process improvement concepts. Identifies logical flaws in the evidence from business process management sources. Questions viewpoints of business process management experts. Discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and business process improvement sources. Capacity to explain and apply business process improvement concepts is supported by robust evidence from research/course materials. Questions viewpoints of business process management experts. Analysis and evaluation reflect growing judgement, rigor and adaptability. Critically discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and business process improvement sources substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials. Questions viewpoints of business process management experts and offers critical analysis of information taken from outside sources. Business process management information is taken from sources with a high level of interpretation/evaluation to develop a comprehensive critical analysis or synthesis. Identifies gaps in knowledge. Exhibits intellectual independence, rigor, good judgement and adaptability. PROJ 6009 Assessment 1 Brief July 2018 Page 8 of 10 Assessment Attributes Fail (0-49) Pass (50-64) Credit (65-74) Distinction (75-84) High Distinction (85-100) Establishment and justification of governance processes for business process management change to ensure that all stakeholders are considered in technology change decisions 35% Fails to analyse, establish or justify governance processes for business process management change. Confuses logic and emotion. Business process management Information taken from reliable sources but without a coherent analysis or synthesis. Lacks evidence from the view point of business process management experts. Analyses governance processes for business process management change but resembles a recall or summary of business process management. Conflates/confuses assertion of personal opinion with business process management information from the research/course materials. Attempts to synthesise citation from business process management sources. Viewpoints of business process management experts are taken as fact with little questioning. Analyses governance processes for business process management change. Demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply business process management concepts. Identifies logical flaws in the business process management sources Questions viewpoints of business process management experts. Analyses, establishes, and justifies governance processes for business process management change to ensure key stakeholders are considered in technology change decisions. Discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and business process management sources. Capacity to explain and apply business process management concepts is supported by robust evidence from research/course materials. Questions viewpoints of business process management experts. Analysis and evaluation reflect growing judgement, rigor and adaptability. Critically analyses, establishes, and justifies governance processes for business process management change and ensures all stakeholders are considered in technology change decisions. Critically discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and business process management sources substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials. Questions viewpoints of business process management experts and offers critical analysis of information taken from outside sources. Information is taken from sources with a high level of interpretation/evaluation to develop a comprehensive critical analysis or synthesis. Identifies gaps in knowledge. Exhibits intellectual independence, rigor, good judgement and adaptability. PROJ 6009 Assessment 1 Brief July 2018 Page 9 of 10 Assessment Attributes Fail (0-49) Pass (50-64) Credit (65-74) Distinction (75-84) High Distinction (85-100) Effective communication 20% Difficult to understand for audience, no logical/clear structure, poor flow of ideas, argument lacks supporting evidence. No effort is made to keep audience engaged, audience cannot follow the line of reasoning. Little use of presentation aids, or the presentation aids and material used are irrelevant. Information, arguments and evidence are presented in a way that is not always clear and logical. Attempts are made to keep the audience engaged, but not always successful. Line of reasoning is often difficult to follow. Presentation aids are used more for effect than relevance. Information, arguments and evidence are well presented, mostly clear flow of ideas and arguments. The audience is mostly engaged, line of reasoning is easy to follow. Effective use of presentation aids. Information, arguments and evidence are very well presented, the presentation is logical, clear and well supported by evidence. Engages the audience, demonstrates cultural sensitivity. Carefully and well prepared presentations aids are used. Expertly presented; the presentation is logical, persuasive, and well supported by evidence, demonstrating a clear flow of ideas and arguments. Engages and sustains audiences interest in the topic, demonstrates high levels of cultural sensitivity Effective use of diverse presentation aids, including graphics and multimedia. PROJ 6009 Assessment 1 Brief July 2018 Page 10 of 10 Assessment Attributes Fail (0-49) Pass (50-64) Credit (65-74) Distinction (75-84) High Distinction (85-100) 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 relevant research sources to support and develop ideas. There are mistakes in using the APA style. Is written according to academic genre (e.g. with introduction, conclusion or summary) and has accurate spelling, grammar, sentence and paragraph construction. Demonstrates consistent use of credible and relevant research sources to support and develop ideas, but these are not always explicit or well developed. There are no mistakes in using the APA style. 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 support and develop ideas. There are no mistakes in using the APA style. 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 reading beyond the key reading There are no mistakes in using the APA style. Expertly written and adheres to the academic genre. Demonstrates expert use of highquality, credible and relevant research sources to support and develop arguments and position statements. Shows extensive evidence of reading beyond the key reading There are no mistakes in using the APA Style.
