Identify a real local or global organisation that is currently facing significant issues and critically analyse how a Systems Thinking approach can assist in making optimal decisions.
MGT603_ Assessment 1_ Part A & Part B Page 1 of 8 ASSESSMENT 1 BRIEF Subject Code and Title MGT603: Systems Thinking Assessment Part A: Proposal Individual (500 words) Part B : Critique Individual (250 words) Individual/Group Individual Length Part A: One Original Post (500 words) Part B: 2 Critiques. Each critique should be maximum 250 words. (Overall 500 words) Learning Outcomes a) Critically evaluate the paradigms of Systems Thinking conceptualisation and its application to contemporary business issues Submission Part A: By 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Friday of Module 2.2 (week 4) Part B: By 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Friday of Module 3.1 (week 5) For intensive class: Part A: By 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Friday of Module 2.2 (week 2) Part B: By 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Friday of Module 3.1 (week 3) Weighting Part A: 20% Part B: 20% Total Marks Part A: 20 marks Part B: 20 marks Context: Systems Thinking requires you to take a holistic view of the world we live in and the organisations we work with. This assessment has been prescribed to appraise students’ ability to think holistically and generate discussion around recognising and understanding organisational operations using a Systems Thinking lens. The assessment will broaden your knowledge of and appreciation for using a different approach to look for and solve problems faced by managers in contemporary organisations. MGT603_ Assessment 1_ Part A & Part B Page 2 of 8 This assessment has been designed to: • Appraise your ability to academically research and evaluate paradigms of Systems Thinking conceptualisation and apply to contemporary business issues. • You are expected to utilise the literature provided in Modules 1 to 3.1 in your analysis and discussion, and are required to apply critical thinking, presenting multi-sided findings. • Successful completion of this assessment will help you to further understand Systems Thinking in a practical context. It will also help you to maintain currency in the increasingly changing industry. Guidelines: There are two (2) parts to Assessment 1. For an acceptable result, you will need to complete Part A and Part B of Assessment 1. Part A: Proposal Individual (500 words) Instructions: • Identify a real local or global organisation that is currently facing significant issues and critically analyse how a Systems Thinking approach can assist in making optimal decisions. For example: You are working as operations manager in a company of your choice. This company has been in business for almost 10 years and is now being confronted with many operational issues related to inventory management. Sometimes there is excess stock and other times shortage of the inventory that are hearting the bottom line performance of the company. In addition to that new competitors and demand from customers to deliver faster and cheaper require organization a different approach rather than just solving the inventory problems. • Once you have chosen your organisation and connected issue you are then required to prepare and post in the Assessment 1 Discussion Forum at least one (1) original post identifying intended or unintended consequences on various stakeholders of their chosen organisation and then recommend/propose alternative policies/procedures using Systems Thinking approach to help overcome the problem. Key points to consider in your initial post: Your proposal should be holistic. You must include reference to “Systems Thinking Literature”. Consider using Systems Thinking tools such as Rich Picture and CATWOE etc. MGT603_ Assessment 1_ Part A & Part B Page 3 of 8 • Students are also required to provide a brief rationale of why it is important to use Systems Thinking and relevant tools and techniques to solve the identified organisational problem to minimise adverse consequences. • Please ensure your original posts are in the discussion forum by the end of Module 2.2 (week 4). • Please make sure to use at least 3 academic related (peer-reviewed journal articles, book chapters, conference papers) in your posts. It is essential that you use appropriate APA style for citing and referencing research. Please see more information on referencing here http://library.laureate.net.au/research_skills/referencing Part B: 2 Critiques. Each critique 250 words. Instructions: • Each student is required to critique an original post (Part A) of two (2) peers. • Each Critique should be maximum 250 words. Overall your Assessment 1 (Part B) should be 500 words. • Your Critique should include commentary on: Whether the original post is holistic. Please identify missing components, if any, and provide constructive feedback. Have all plausible consequences been identified? Have Systems Thinking tools been used and used properly? Please provide a critique on these tools and there use in solving the problem identified. Please make sure to highlight the authors of the chosen posts. Please ensure to submit Assessment 1 (Part B) in the related Discussion Forum Thread, by the end of Module 3.1 (week 5) It is essential that you use appropriate APA style for citing and referencing research where necessary and required. Please see more information on referencing here http://library.laureate.net.au/research_skills/referencing Student must actively seek feedback and inputs from peers and facilitator. The individual student should organise discussion notes and upload it on the Blackboard accordingly. http://library.laureate.net.au/research_skills/referencing http://library.laureate.net.au/research_skills/referencing MGT603_ Assessment 1_ Part A & Part B Page 4 of 8 Please note the following additional information • This assessment is designed to create robust discussion around Systems Thinking with your peers. Please feel free to post more than what is specified to broaden your understanding and appreciation of the topic. • While presenting your views, you are required to support claims either with the relevant experience or with the published literature. This includes journal articles, relevant website links, news article, magazines or text from related books. • The views could be supporting comments or they may be a contradiction, but you need to provide appropriate justification as specified above. • If referring to published literature to support stated views, you are required to provide relevant reference (and citation) in the response. If you can provide appropriate articles to support opinion, it will be valued considerably. • Along with actively participating in the discussions, it is equally important to provide responses, which are relevant and add value to the discussion. The quality of response will be considered as one of the most important criteria for evaluating students in Assessment 1, Part B. Submission Instructions: Submit Part A) – Proposal, Individual (500 words) via the Assessment 1 Discussion Forum link in the Assessment section found in the main navigation menu of the subject Blackboard site. Submit Part B) - Critique, Individual (Overall 500 words) via Assessment 1 Discussion Forum link in the Assessment section found in the main navigation menu of the subject Blackboard site. The Learning Facilitator will provide feedback via the Grade Centre in the LMS portal. Feedback can be viewed in My Grades. MGT603_ Assessment 1_ Part A & Part B Page 5 of 8 Learning Rubric: MGT603 Systems Thinking Assessment 1 Part A and Part B Assessment Attributes Fail (Unacceptable) 0-49% Pass (Functional) 50-64% Credit (Proficient) 65-74% Distinction (Advanced) 75 -84% High Distinction (Exceptional) 85-100% Knowledge and understanding (technical and theoretical knowledge) Understands theoretical models and concepts Percentage for this criterion 25% Limited understanding of required concepts and knowledge Key components of the assignment are not addressed. Stakeholders, goals, intended and unintended consequences of the policy change are not addressed. Tools and techniques of systems thinking such as Rich picture, Causal loop diagrams, etc. are not identified Knowledge or understanding of the field or discipline. Resembles a recall or summary of key ideas. Often confuses assertion of personal opinion with information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials. Stakeholders, goals, intended and unintended consequences of the policy change are addressed at very preliminary level. Tools and techniques of systems thinking such as Rich picture, Causal loop diagrams, etc. are used but at very superficial level Thorough knowledge or understanding of the field or discipline/s. Supports personal opinion and information substantiated by evidence from the research/course materials. Demonstrates a capacity to explain and apply relevant concepts. Stakeholders, goals, intended and unintended consequences of the policy change are addressed at appropriate level. Tools and techniques of systems thinking such as Rich picture, Causal loop diagrams, etc. are used with clarity. Highly developed understanding of the field or discipline/s. 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 relevant concepts. Stakeholders, goals, intended and unintended consequences of the policy change are addressed comprehensively. Tools and techniques of systems thinking such as Rich picture, Causal loop diagrams, etc. are used A sophisticated understanding of the field or discipline/s. Systematically and critically discriminates between assertion of personal opinion and information substantiated by robust evidence from the research/course materials and extended reading. Mastery of concepts and application to new situations/further learning. Stakeholders, goals, intended and unintended consequences of the policy change are addressed thoroughly. Tools and techniques of systems thinking such as MGT603_ Assessment 1_ Part A & Part B Page 6 of 8 with high level of understanding Rich picture, Causal loop diagrams, etc. are used demonstrating mastery in the use of these tools. Context, Audience and Purpose Percentage for this criterion