IS6138 Digital Governance And Compliance Assessment Brief 2026 | University College Cork

IS6138 Assessment Brief

Module Information

Module: IS6138
Module Name: Digital Governance and Compliance
Assessment Weighting: 50% of Module Mark
Due Date: Saturday, April 04th, 2026, at 17:00

Assignment Overview

It is early 2026. You are a consultant specialising in Digital Governance & Compliance . You have been employed by the UK Cabinet Office (CO) to advise on the governance issues that arose in the ongoing Post Office Limited (POL) / Horizon Scandal.

The CO is a central Government Office that has a coordinating role among the various Departments of State and Government Organisations. The CO, including the Prime Minister, has asked how such a situation could have occurred and continue for so many years.

While this Scandal has numerous dimensions, they have particular concerns around the Governance of the Programme, initially in the area of IT but particularly in the interaction between Government IT specialists, Government Officials, the POL and the supplier of the Horizon System, Fujitsu (initially ICL).

The CO have asked you to advise and make recommendations on the key areas of Governance Failure and what improvements can be made to ensure that such a Scandal could not happen again.

This assignment is a critical one from a UK Government perspective as the new Labour Government are about to launch numerous programmes of digital transformation, and they feel that trust and reputation with the public and suppliers must be restored. As importantly, the UK Government must show the Markets that they are competent and can deliver on necessary policy commitments to major ICT enabled programmes. The Government relies on the markets for the funding of large-scale investments.

Background Of The Scandal

The Post Office Horizon scandal in the UK involved the wrongful prosecution of over 700 postmasters and postmistresses between 2000 and 2014. The issue stemmed from errors in the Horizon IT system, supplied by Fujitsu, which the Post Office relied on to manage financial accounts. The system falsely indicated shortfalls in branch accounts, leading the Post Office to accuse many of theft, fraud, and false accounting. Despite postmasters protesting their innocence and questioning the reliability of Horizon, the Post Office pursued criminal charges.

Many of those accused were convicted, resulting in prison sentences, fines, job losses, and reputational damage. The Post Office denied the flaws in Horizon for years, maintaining that the system was sound. However, as the number of cases grew, evidence emerged that the software had significant defects. This led to the wrongful imprisonment of innocent workers who suffered emotional and financial ruin.

Eventually, a group of postmasters successfully sued the Post Office, and in 2019, a High Court ruling found that Horizon was indeed faulty. By 2021, the convictions of many postmasters were quashed, and the UK government launched a public inquiry into the scandal. Compensation for victims has been slow and is ongoing, with the scandal widely regarded as one of the UK’s worst miscarriages of justice.

Your Task

The CO is particularly concerned about the governance of the program, especially the interaction between Government IT specialists, Government Officials, the POL, and Fujitsu (formerly ICL).

• Your task is to write a report for the CO.
• You must identify the key governance failures that occurred.
• You must provide recommendations to prevent such failures from happening again.
• Your report must draw on concepts and ideas discussed in the course.
• The new Labour Government wants to restore public trust in Government digital transformation programs and demonstrate to the markets that they can effectively deliver on major ICT-enabled programs.

Report Requirements

Your report structure must include, at a minimum:

• A one-page Executive Summary.
• A Table of Contents.
• The main body of the report.
• A Bibliography.
• Any relevant Annexes.

The Report must include, at a minimum, the following:

• A description of your approach/methodology and justification for same.
• An ordered list of key governance failures, prioritized by significance.
• Analysis of the root causes of these failures – superficial statements will not suffice (ask the question why, four times).
• An assessment of the potential impact of relevant contextual issues like culture, procurement rules, and government policy.
• Technical discussions should be limited to context – you should not enter into detailed technical issues e.g. network architectures or functional elements of EWS like Cerner or Epic).

Important Notes

• All material that is not your own must be properly referenced.
• Do not copy large sections of material; summarize or use short quotes.
• Your report must be your own work, reflecting your experience and knowledge from the course. Course material must be used.
• Include a cover page with your student number and name.
• Complete the covering Decelaration Sheet.
• You may be asked to present your report verbally with a Q&A session.

Report Format

• Cover Page: Student Number, Student Name.
• Word Count: 3,500 words, excluding references.
• Referencing: Harvard Referencing style.
• Font: Times New Roman, size 12.
• Spacing: 1.5.
• Submission: MS Word on Canvas under “Assignments”.

Plagiarism And AI Use

• The University’s Plagiarism Policy will be strictly enforced. See UCC Policy on Plagiarism.
• Your assessment MUST be your own work.
• All ideas or words that are not your own must be acknowledged and referenced.
• There will be a check for plagiarism.
• Do not share text with other students for use in their assessments.
• You may discuss topics and share ideas, but your report must be your own writing.

AI Use

Firstly, your attention is drawn to UCC policy on use of AI @  https://www.ucc.ie/en/ethical-use-of-generative-ai-toolkit/academic-integrity/

• Declare any use of AI tools.
• Indicate how and why AI was used in your Methodology section.
• Check AI results for accuracy and relevance.
• Use AI for repetitive tasks or to find supporting evidence, but not to generate findings or recommendations automatically.

Marking Scheme

• Report methodology and structure: 20%
• Identification and analysis of key issues: 30%
• Governance recommendations with justification: 30%
• Analysis of relevant contextual issues: 20%
• See marking Rubrics on Canvas unser Assignments.

Penalties For Late Submission

Up to 7 days late: 10% deduction
Up to 14 days late: 20% deduction
15 days or more late: Zero marks