Operations and Projects Management
AssessmentBriefing

Highlights of Assignment -1

You need to choose one case (preferably your organisation) for your individual case report. You will discuss this with your tutor before finalising the topic. Your critical analysis of the case will help you to answer the following questions:

Q1. Identify three important Operation Management (OM) decision areas (eg., quality, layout and process design) in your chosen case company. Critically analyse the present activities of the firm on the chosen OM decision areas and suggest ways to improve performance (maximum 1500 Words).

Q2: Evaluate the strengths and weakness of the company in such a way to show how both can be synergistically exploited to improve the performance (maximum 500 words).

Use Academic references and OM theory for discussing your case.

Further information
Assignment -1 – Individual Report – Operations Management (50%)

You will be required to undertake a case study and complete a case analysis report. This can be based on operations of your previous workplace or any other organisation known to you. You need to discuss and confirm with your tutor to agree upon a suitable case. The report will be 2,000 words in length (not including references and appendices). It should include answers to all the case questions (given above) and must make use of relevant unit concepts on the aspectcovered.
Composition of Marks for Assignment 1:
Assessment Criteria         F (<35%)    E (35-39%)    D (40-49%)    C (50-59%)    B (60-69%)    A (>=70%)

Evaluation of Strengths & Weaknesses of Company    20%    Strengths and weaknesses are described, with no evaluation.
The student fails to demonstrate a real understanding of all the issues involved.    Strengths and weaknesses are described and discussion is limited.    Some evaluation of strengths and weaknesses of company.
Discussion is narrow and not well supported.
Good evaluation of strengths and weaknesses.  Discussion accurate but lacking depth and only limited evidence to support.    A very good evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of the case considered, supported by strong evidence.
A comprehensive answer that shows a sound evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of the company, supported by evidences and appropriate examples.

Critical Analysis of  3 OM Decision Areas & Ways to Improve Performance

60%    Very little or no evidence of the ability to appreciate the OM decision areas in the case. Alternatively, heavy reliance on large chunks of the case.
No/very limited attempt to use evidence to support the arguments.
Illogical/unfounded ways to improve performance.    Some attempt is made to appreciate OM decision areas in the case.
Arguments are baseless and weak.
Dubious logic used to  suggest ways to improve performance.

Attempted to critically analyse 3 OM decision areas but lacks supporting evidence from the literature and practices of the case company.
The logical link between OM areas and improved performance is satisfactory
Some evidence of critical analysis of 3 OM decision areas, supported by the literature and /or OM theory.
Some logical recommendations to improve performance.

A good critical analysis of 3 OM decision areas in the case, supported by some evidence from the literature to support the discussion.
Some sound recommendations to improve performance.

Comprehensive critical analysis of 3 OM decision areas in the case, supported by strong evidence from the literature, to support the discussion.
Sensible and logical, substantiated recommendations to improve performance.
Structure, presentation  & Referencing
20%

Poor/illogical structure.
Poor report presentation, with poor grammar and readability.
Referencing limited and not in Harvard format.    Some structure is evident but not effective.
Presentation unsatisfactory and/or some grammar issues affecting readability.
Significant errors in Harvard Referencing format    Structure and presentation of the report is satisfactory.
Readability is acceptable, though some grammar issues.
Harvard reference format used correctly, referencing is limited.

Good report structure and presentation.
Some referencing is used to support discussion.
A good logical structure is evident
Presentation of the report and readability are very good.
Good references are used to support the discussion.    A well-structured report, where the arguments are presented in a logical order.
Professional presentation with excellent readability.
Wide range of high quality references to support the discussion.