| Category | Assignment | Subject | Business |
|---|---|---|---|
| University | University of the West of Scotland | Module Title | LNDN08004 Operations in Business |
L1: Demonstrate a critical understanding of the functional role of operations in an organisation and its strategic importance.
L2: Demonstrate knowledge and critical understanding of issues associated with the design and management of the operations of an organisation.
L3: Demonstrate knowledge of planning and control systems.
This is an individual report of 2500 words and carries 70% marks. The topic is provided in this handbook. The submission date for this assignment is 14th Nov 2025 by 11:59 pm. Assignments must be submitted through the Turnitin link provided within the module AULA page. Deadlines must be strictly adhered to. You must submit your assignment on, or before, the submission date and time provided. Please note that a submission will be considered late even if it is only a few seconds after the published deadline.
Report Title: Operations design challenges at X
Instruction: Conduct desk research to complete the activities below and compile the final report:
a) X - Select a manufacturing-based organization of your choice from any sector (e.g., automotive, pharma, food, textile etc).
b) Provide an assessment of the operations objectives that you think are relevant to the chosen organization. Establish a link between the performance objective and operations strategy adopted by the chosen organization.
c) Provide a critical assessment of the issues and factors associated with the product and / or process design and management of the operations adopted by the organization. Demonstrate the influence of product / process design related issues towards the overall operational success / failure within the chosen organization. Identify the root cause of such design issues.
d) Demonstrate the scope of improvement including logical recommendation for the chosen organization.
Word Count: Maximum 2,500 words (+ 10%) excluding references, a structured guideline is provided in this assignment brief. Mark will be deducted if word count exceeded.
Font= Times New Roman,
Font size = 12 (for heading and main paragraph)
Line spacing = 1.5,
Title page = Title page must include your assignment topic, programme of study, module code, module name, module coordinator name and all group members name and Banner ID.
Headings should be bold.
Reference: Harvard style, citation software such as Mendeley can be used. It’s free and can be accessed online from the following website:
https://www.mendeley.com/homepage8/?switchedFrom= To learn Mendeley following a video tutorial can be useful: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gv6_HuCYExM
This coursework develops upon your research and analysis of the organisational studies OM. The assignment extends the research and analysis of the case study organisation’s OM practices. The work should be presented within a report structure. Each section of the report should be structured and defined, and an introduction or overview should be provided.
An executive summary is not required. Across the report you will also need to show evidence of assessing a range of resources, e.g., internet, journals, textbooks, and organisational documents such as annual reports, sustainability reports, company newsfeeds etc. A Harvard Referencing style should be followed.
The report is marked out of 100%.
Where a module is assessed by written report work you must accept the responsibility and ownership for any work produced. Please see the UWS Student Guide to Undertaking Individual/Group work available on AULA site. If you have any problems or difficulties in working, you should report this immediately to the Module Coordinator.
Turnitin submission is the approved method for your programme of study. You must submit your assessed assignments to the relevant module AULA site. Submission of a printed copy is NOT allowed. Please consult the Turnitin information on your programme AULA site and work through the ‘Guide’ to familiarise yourself with the Turnitin submission. Module Coordinator will explain any exceptions to Turnitin submission for your Module, if it applies any special circumstance.
Your attention is drawn to the University’s policy on Plagiarism and Collusion which apply to this assessment. Details are available in your Student Diary.
You should also be aware that late submissions will be penalised in line with University regulations.
| Attributes | Weighting | Mark/Comment |
|
Introduction Guiding the reader what is included in the assignment, sequence, and brief explanation of the sections. Highlight the key focus of the work done. Introduce the case briefly. |
5% |
|
|
Understanding the strategic importance of OM in a context This assesses the capability of demonstrating the role of OM in an organizational setting. This assesses the capability of identifying the key OM objectives within an organization. Identify the core OM approaches to achieve operational excellence. Assess the range of |
35% |
|
|
literature and other resources used. Use of practical examples from varieties of sources. |
|
|
|
Capability of evaluating OM design Challenges Assess the evaluation capacity and capability of how OM design (e.g., product / process design) influence the overall OM aims and objectives in a context. Critical assessment of OM design challenges. Assess the range of literature and other resources used. Use of practical examples from varieties of sources |
40% |
|
|
Recommendations and Conclusion Assess the capability of developing logical, practical, data/info driven and valid recommendation and conclusion withing the chosen context |
10% |
|
|
Overall quality of presentation Report Structure - Structure, flow, presentation, academic writing style Referencing - Use of Harvard Referencing style. Application of academic sources and demonstration of applied critical thought. |
10% |
|
|
|
||
| Total |
100% |
|
Choose a car manufacturer of your choice in any context. However, you MUST discuss yourinitial plan and motivation for choosing the company with your lecturer. You can only proceed with your work once your lecturer agrees with the chosen company. You MUST attach the relevant evidence (e.g., copy of email confirmation) from your lecturer.
Identify some key planning and control tools (e.g., scheduling tool, inventory tool, ERP, MRP, JIT, quality control charts, kanban, etc) and demonstrate their application to achieve operational excellence in the chosen organization. Draw a diagram to show the planning and control tool suggested for the organization and how the tool is linked to achieve operational excellence.
Label all relevant info (e.g., flow of materials / resources, flow of info, flow of finance etc) using process map symbol within the diagram whenever necessary and relevant. The poster can be produced using MS PowerPoint or any other software of your choice.
Suggested Word Count: Maximum 600 words (+/- 10%) excluding references. Use more diagram and process map related approaches than words. Mark will be deducted if word count exceeded.
Note assessments submitted up to one week late will have 10 marks deducted from the final mark. Assessments submitted after the one-week deadline a mark of zero will be recorded. You MUST attach the signed declaration form. See the copy of a declaration form in appendix C of this document.
Written Feedback will be provided via AULA. The marking criteria below will form the basis of the feedback.
| Attributes | Weighting | LO covered |
| Quality of the presentation: | 30% |
|
|
This covers the clarity, design layout, visualization of planning and control chart / tools, coherence, grammatical accuracy, tone, and style of the work submitted. There should be correct and consistent Harvard format referencing where appropriate. |
|
LO3 |
| Quality of the argument/reflection put forward: | 70% | |
|
This covers the evidence in place to identify the appropriate planning and control tool to support the points made. A clear structure with logical justification of selecting a control tool. Understand the clear application scenario and related operational benefits of the proposed planning and control tools within the chosen organization. |
|
|
Detailed grading Matrix for Assessment 1
| Grade | Description of evidence |
|
90 – 100 (A1)
Exceptional |
Introduction: Exceptionally outline the key aims and objectives of the report. Very clear guidance for the reader what is expected in the subsequent sections in the report. Brilliantly and concisely introduce the case company highlighting and linking the key aspects of the reports. Understanding the strategic importance of OM in a context: It displays exceptional knowledge and understanding on different aspects of OM and its importance. Insight, originality, and exceptional ability to analyse and evaluate how OM objectives are met applying core OM related approaches and strategies. Capability of evaluating OM design Challenges: Exceptionally talent to identify and evaluate the OM design related issues and challenges in a context. Very high ability in professional practice skills in identifying the root cause of relevant OM design issues. Evidence of high degree of almost complete autonomy and independent judgement to provide solution to the OM design related issues. Recommendations and Conclusion: Exemplary and unique consultative judgement based on data and information collected. Proposed outside of box ideas and innovative OM practices and approaches to address OM design related challenges in a context. Quality of presentation: Exceptional structure, presentation, academic writing including Harvard referencing, and clear communication of proposed ideas, theories, and recommendations across with no spelling and grammatical error. Highly cohesive and coherent write up. |
|
80 – 89 (A2)
Outstanding Significantly exceeds threshold standard for a pass |
Introduction: The coverage of key aims and objectives of the report is outstanding. Clear guidance for the reader what is expected in the subsequent sections in the report. Concisely introduce the case company highlighting and linking the key aspects of the reports. Understanding the strategic importance of OM in a context: It displays a consistently thorough, deep, and extensive knowledge and understanding on different aspects of OM and its importance. Originality and very high-level ability to analyse and evaluate how OM objectives are met applying core OM related approaches and strategies. Capability of evaluating OM design Challenges: Outstanding talent to identify and evaluate the OM design related issues and challenges in a context. Very high ability in professional practice skills in identifying the root cause of relevant OM design issues. Evidence of high degree of almost complete autonomy and independent judgement to provide solution to the OM design related issues relative to threshold expectations. Used wide range of practical examples to support arguments. Recommendations and Conclusion: Unique, practical, and credible consultative judgement based on data and information collected. Proposed outside of box ideas and innovative OM practices and approaches to address OM design related challenges in a context. Quality of presentation: Outstanding structure, presentation, academic writing including Harvard referencing, and clear communication of proposed ideas, theories, and recommendations across with extremely limited spelling and grammatical error. Highly cohesive and coherent write up.
|
|
70 – 79 (A3)
Excellent Very much exceeds threshold standard for a pass |
Introduction: Excellent coverage of key aims and objectives of the report. Clear guidance for the reader what is expected in the subsequent sections in the report. Concisely introduce the case company highlighting and linking the key aspects of the reports. Understanding the strategic importance of OM in a context: It displays a consistently thorough, deep, and/ or extensive knowledge and understanding on different aspects of OM and its importance. Very high ability to analyse and evaluate how OM objectives are met applying core OM related approaches and strategies. Use wide range of practical cases to support the arguments. Capability of evaluating OM design Challenges: Excellent capability to identify and evaluate the OM design related issues and challenges in a context. Very high ability in professional practice skills in identifying the root cause of relevant OM design issues. Evidence of high degree of almost complete autonomy and independent judgement to provide solution to the OM design related issues relative to threshold expectations. Used wide range of practical cases to support arguments. Recommendations and Conclusion: Practical, and credible consultative judgement based on data and information collected. Proposed innovative OM practices, ideas, strategies and approaches to address OM design related challenges in a context. Quality of presentation: Excellent structure, presentation, academic writing including Harvard referencing, and clear communication of proposed ideas, theories, and recommendations across with limited spelling and grammatical error. Highly consistent and coherent write up. |
|
60 – 69 (B1)
Very good Well above threshold standard for a pass |
Introduction: Very good coverage of key aims and objectives of the report. Clear guidance for the reader what is expected in the subsequent sections in the report. Concisely introduce the case company highlighting and linking the key aspects of the reports. Understanding the strategic importance of OM in a context: It displays a consistently very good level of knowledge and understanding on different aspects of OM and its importance. Very good ability to analyse and evaluate how OM objectives are met applying core OM related approaches and strategies. Indicate of practical cases to support the arguments. Capability of evaluating OM design Challenges: Very good capability to identify and evaluate the OM design related issues and challenges in a context. High ability in professional practice skills in identifying the root cause of relevant OM design issues. Evidence of significant independent judgement to provide solution to the OM design related issues relative to threshold expectations. Use of practical cases to support arguments. Recommendations and Conclusion: Practical, and credible consultative judgement based on data and information collected. Proposed some practical OM practices, ideas, strategies, and approaches to address OM design related challenges in a context. Quality of presentation: Very good structure, presentation, academic writing including Harvard referencing, and clear communication of proposed ideas, theories, and recommendations across with limited spelling and grammatical error. Mostly consistent and coherent write up. |
|
50 – 59 (B2)
Good Above threshold standard for a pass |
Introduction: Good coverage of key aims and objectives of the report. Some guidance for the reader what is expected in the subsequent sections in the report. Probably introduce the case company highlighting and linking the key aspects of the reports. Understanding the strategic importance of OM in a context: It displays a generally good level of knowledge and understanding on different aspects of OM and its importance. Good ability to analyse and evaluate how OM objectives are met applying core OM related approaches and strategies. Capability of evaluating OM design Challenges: Good capability to identify and evaluate the OM design related issues and challenges in a context. Good ability in professional practice skills in identifying the root cause of relevant OM design issues. Use some of practical cases to support arguments. Recommendations and Conclusion: Logical consultative judgement based on data and information collected. Proposed some logical OM practices, ideas, strategies, and approaches to address OM design related challenges in a context. Quality of presentation: Good structure, presentation, academic writing including Harvard referencing, and clear communication of proposed ideas, theories, and recommendations across with few spelling and grammatical error. Consistent and coherent write up relative to threshold expectations. |
|
40 – 49 (C)
Basic competence Meets threshold standard for a pass |
Introduction: Basic coverage of key aims and objectives of the report. Probably some guidance but not entirely clear for the reader what is expected in the subsequent sections in the report. Probably introduce the case company but with limited highlighting and linking the key aspects of the reports. Understanding the strategic importance of OM in a context: It displays just satisfactory and basic level of knowledge and understanding on most aspects of OM and its importance. Satisfactory or basic level of analysis and evaluation on how OM objectives are met applying core OM related approaches and strategies. Capability of evaluating OM design Challenges: Basic level of capability to identify and evaluate the OM design related issues and challenges in a context. Limited professional practice skills in identifying the root cause of relevant OM design issues. Probably, use some of practical cases to support arguments. Recommendations and Conclusion: Basic level of judgement based on data and information collected. Proposed some basic and generic OM practices, ideas, strategies, and approaches to address OM design related challenges in a context. Quality of presentation: Basic structure, presentation, academic writing including Harvard referencing, and communication of proposed ideas, theories, and recommendations across with few spelling and grammatical error. Meet the acceptable label of coherency and consistent write up. |
|
30 – 39 (D)
Does not meet threshold standard for a pass |
Introduction: No clear aims and objectives of the report. Probably some guidance but not entirely clear for the reader what is expected in the subsequent sections in the report. Probably introduce the case company but with limited highlighting and linking the key aspects of the reports. Understanding the strategic importance of OM in a context: It displays some incomplete and unclear knowledge and understanding on most aspects of OM and its importance. Limited ability in analysis and evaluation on how OM objectives are met applying core OM related approaches and strategies. Capability of evaluating OM design Challenges: Limited capability to identify and evaluate the OM design related issues and challenges in a context. Limited professional practice skills in identifying the root cause of relevant OM design issues. Limited or no evidence of practical cases to support arguments. Recommendations and Conclusion: Unclear or no judgement based on data and information collected. Lack of basic and generic skills and knowledge on identifying OM practices, ideas, strategies, and approaches to address OM design related challenges in a context. Quality of presentation: Poor structure, presentation, academic writing including Harvard referencing, and communication of proposed ideas, theories, and recommendations across with spelling and grammatical error. Doe not meet the acceptable label of coherency and consistent write up. |
| 1 – 29 (E) |
Introduction: No clear aims and objectives of the report. No guidance for the reader what is expected in the subsequent sections in the report. Very limited introduction of the case company and with very limited highlights and links with the key aspects of the reports. Understanding the strategic importance of OM in a context: It displays very limited knowledge and understanding on most aspects of OM and its importance. Inability in analysis and evaluation on how OM objectives are met applying core OM related approaches and strategies. |
| Well below threshold standard for a pass |
Capability of evaluating OM design Challenges: Very limited and well below level of expectation of capability to identify and evaluate the OM design related issues and challenges in a context. Very limited and well below the expectation of professional practice skills in identifying the root cause of relevant OM design issues. Limited or no evidence of practical cases to support arguments. Recommendations and Conclusion: No judgement based on data and information collected. Very limited skills and knowledge on identifying OM practices, ideas, strategies, and approaches to address OM design related challenges in a context. Quality of presentation: Very poor structure, presentation, academic writing including Harvard referencing, and communication of proposed ideas, theories, and recommendations across with spelling and grammatical error. Well below the acceptable label of coherency and consistent write up. |
|
0 (N)
No work to asses |
There is no work to be assessed at first diet, or there is incomplete or no engagement with re-assessment |
| Grade | Description of evidence |
|
90 – 100 (A1)
Exceptional |
Introduction: Exceptionally outline the key aims and objectives of the report. Very clear guidance for the reader what is expected in the subsequent sections in the report. Brilliantly and concisely introduce the case company highlighting and linking the key aspects of the reports. Understanding the strategic importance of OM in a context: It displays exceptional knowledge and understanding on different aspects of OM and its importance. Insight, originality, and exceptional ability to analyse and evaluate how OM objectives are met applying core OM related approaches and strategies. Capability of evaluating OM design Challenges: Exceptionally talent to identify and evaluate the OM design related issues and challenges in a context. Very high ability in professional practice skills in identifying the root cause of relevant OM design issues. Evidence of high degree of almost complete autonomy and independent judgement to provide solution to the OM design related issues. Recommendations and Conclusion: Exemplary and unique consultative judgement based on data and information collected. Proposed outside of box ideas and innovative OM practices and approaches to address OM design related challenges in a context. Quality of presentation: Exceptional structure, presentation, academic writing including Harvard referencing, and clear communication of proposed ideas, theories, and recommendations across with no spelling and grammatical error. Highly cohesive and coherent write up. |
|
80 – 89 (A2)
Outstanding Significantly exceeds threshold standard for a pass |
Introduction: The coverage of key aims and objectives of the report is outstanding. Clear guidance for the reader what is expected in the subsequent sections in the report. Concisely introduce the case company highlighting and linking the key aspects of the reports. Understanding the strategic importance of OM in a context: It displays a consistently thorough, deep, and extensive knowledge and understanding on different aspects of OM and its importance. Originality and very high-level ability to analyse and evaluate how OM objectives are met applying core OM related approaches and strategies. Capability of evaluating OM design Challenges: Outstanding talent to identify and evaluate the OM design related issues and challenges in a context. Very high ability in professional practice skills in identifying the root cause of relevant OM design issues. Evidence of high degree of almost complete autonomy and independent judgement to provide solution to the OM design related issues relative to threshold expectations. Used wide range of practical examples to support arguments. Recommendations and Conclusion: Unique, practical, and credible consultative judgement based on data and information collected. Proposed outside of box ideas and innovative OM practices and approaches to address OM design related challenges in a context. Quality of presentation: Outstanding structure, presentation, academic writing including Harvard referencing, and clear communication of proposed ideas, theories, and recommendations across with extremely limited spelling and grammatical error. Highly cohesive and coherent write up. |
|
70 – 79 (A3)
Excellent Very much exceeds threshold standard for a pass |
Introduction: Excellent coverage of key aims and objectives of the report. Clear guidance for the reader what is expected in the subsequent sections in the report. Concisely introduce the case company highlighting and linking the key aspects of the reports. Understanding the strategic importance of OM in a context: It displays a consistently thorough, deep, and/ or extensive knowledge and understanding on different aspects of OM and its importance. Very high ability to analyse and evaluate how OM objectives are met applying core OM related approaches and strategies. Use wide range of practical cases to support the arguments. Capability of evaluating OM design Challenges: Excellent capability to identify and evaluate the OM design related issues and challenges in a context. Very high ability in professional practice skills in identifying the root cause of relevant OM design issues. Evidence of high degree of almost complete autonomy and independent judgement to provide solution to the OM design related issues relative to threshold expectations. Used wide range of practical cases to support arguments. Recommendations and Conclusion: Practical, and credible consultative judgement based on data and information collected. Proposed innovative OM practices, ideas, strategies and approaches to address OM design related challenges in a context. Quality of presentation: Excellent structure, presentation, academic writing including Harvard referencing, and clear communication of proposed ideas, theories, and recommendations across with limited spelling and grammatical error. Highly consistent and coherent write up. |
|
60 – 69 (B1)
Very good Well above threshold standard for a pass |
Introduction: Very good coverage of key aims and objectives of the report. Clear guidance for the reader what is expected in the subsequent sections in the report. Concisely introduce the case company highlighting and linking the key aspects of the reports. Understanding the strategic importance of OM in a context: It displays a consistently very good level of knowledge and understanding on different aspects of OM and its importance. Very good ability to analyse and evaluate how OM objectives are met applying core OM related approaches and strategies. Indicate of practical cases to support the arguments. Capability of evaluating OM design Challenges: Very good capability to identify and evaluate the OM design related issues and challenges in a context. High ability in professional practice skills in identifying the root cause of relevant OM design issues. Evidence of significant independent judgement to provide solution to the OM design related issues relative to threshold expectations. Use of practical cases to support arguments. Recommendations and Conclusion: Practical, and credible consultative judgement based on data and information collected. Proposed some practical OM practices, ideas, strategies, and approaches to address OM design related challenges in a context. Quality of presentation: Very good structure, presentation, academic writing including Harvard referencing, and clear communication of proposed ideas, theories, and recommendations across with limited spelling and grammatical error. Mostly consistent and coherent write up. |
|
50 – 59 (B2)
Good Above threshold standard for a pass |
Introduction: Good coverage of key aims and objectives of the report. Some guidance for the reader what is expected in the subsequent sections in the report. Probably introduce the case company highlighting and linking the key aspects of the reports. Understanding the strategic importance of OM in a context: It displays a generally good level of knowledge and understanding on different aspects of OM and its importance. Good ability to analyse and evaluate how OM objectives are met applying core OM related approaches and strategies. Capability of evaluating OM design Challenges: Good capability to identify and evaluate the OM design related issues and challenges in a context. Good ability in professional practice skills in identifying the root cause of relevant OM design issues. Use some of practical cases to support arguments. Recommendations and Conclusion: Logical consultative judgement based on data and information collected. Proposed some logical OM practices, ideas, strategies, and approaches to address OM design related challenges in a context. Quality of presentation: Good structure, presentation, academic writing including Harvard referencing, and clear communication of proposed ideas, theories, and recommendations across with few spelling and grammatical error. Consistent and coherent write up relative to threshold expectations. |
|
40 – 49 (C)
Basic competence Meets threshold standard for a pass |
Introduction: Basic coverage of key aims and objectives of the report. Probably some guidance but not entirely clear for the reader what is expected in the subsequent sections in the report. Probably introduce the case company but with limited highlighting and linking the key aspects of the reports. Understanding the strategic importance of OM in a context: It displays just satisfactory and basic level of knowledge and understanding on most aspects of OM and its importance. Satisfactory or basic level of analysis and evaluation on how OM objectives are met applying core OM related approaches and strategies. Capability of evaluating OM design Challenges: Basic level of capability to identify and evaluate the OM design related issues and challenges in a context. Limited professional practice skills in identifying the root cause of relevant OM design issues. Probably, use some of practical cases to support arguments. Recommendations and Conclusion: Basic level of judgement based on data and information collected. Proposed some basic and generic OM practices, ideas, strategies, and approaches to address OM design related challenges in a context. Quality of presentation: Basic structure, presentation, academic writing including Harvard referencing, and communication of proposed ideas, theories, and recommendations across with few spelling and grammatical error. Meet the acceptable label of coherency and consistent write up. |
|
30 – 39 (D)
Does not meet threshold standard for a pass |
Introduction: No clear aims and objectives of the report. Probably some guidance but not entirely clear for the reader what is expected in the subsequent sections in the report. Probably introduce the case company but with limited highlighting and linking the key aspects of the reports. Understanding the strategic importance of OM in a context: It displays some incomplete and unclear knowledge and understanding on most aspects of OM and its importance. Limited ability in analysis and evaluation on how OM objectives are met applying core OM related approaches and strategies. Capability of evaluating OM design Challenges: Limited capability to identify and evaluate the OM design related issues and challenges in a context. Limited professional practice skills in identifying the root cause of relevant OM design issues. Limited or no evidence of practical cases to support arguments. Recommendations and Conclusion: Unclear or no judgement based on data and information collected. Lack of basic and generic skills and knowledge on identifying OM practices, ideas, strategies, and approaches to address OM design related challenges in a context. Quality of presentation: Poor structure, presentation, academic writing including Harvard referencing, and communication of proposed ideas, theories, and recommendations across with spelling and grammatical error. Doe not meet the acceptable label of coherency and consistent write up. |
| 1 – 29 (E) |
Introduction: No clear aims and objectives of the report. No guidance for the reader what is expected in the subsequent sections in the report. Very limited introduction of the case company and with very limited highlights and links with the key aspects of the reports. Understanding the strategic importance of OM in a context: It displays very limited knowledge and understanding on most aspects of OM and its importance. Inability in analysis and evaluation on how OM objectives are met applying core OM related approaches and strategies. |
| Well below threshold standard for a pass |
Capability of evaluating OM design Challenges: Very limited and well below level of expectation of capability to identify and evaluate the OM design related issues and challenges in a context. Very limited and well below the expectation of professional practice skills in identifying the root cause of relevant OM design issues. Limited or no evidence of practical cases to support arguments. Recommendations and Conclusion: No judgement based on data and information collected. Very limited skills and knowledge on identifying OM practices, ideas, strategies, and approaches to address OM design related challenges in a context. Quality of presentation: Very poor structure, presentation, academic writing including Harvard referencing, and communication of proposed ideas, theories, and recommendations across with spelling and grammatical error. Well below the acceptable label of coherency and consistent write up. |
|
0 (N) No work to asses |
There is no work to be assessed at first diet, or there is incomplete or no engagement with re-assessment
|
|
Grade |
Description of evidence |
|
90 – 100 (A1)
Exceptional |
Quality of the Presentation: Exceptional level of clarity, design layout, visualization of planning and control chart / tools, coherence, grammatical accuracy, tone, and style of the work submitted. Correct and consistent Harvard format referencing where appropriate. Quality of the arguments / reflection put forward: Exemplary and exceptional level of evidence in place to identify the appropriate planning and control tool to support the points made. Exceptionally clear structure with logical justification of selecting a control tool. Exceptional and original level of understanding on the application scenario and related operational benefits of the proposed planning and control tools within the chosen organization. Evidence of high degree of almost complete autonomy and independent judgement on core theories of OM. |
|
80 – 89 (A2)
Outstanding Significantly exceeds threshold standard for a pass |
Quality of the Presentation: Outstanding level of clarity, design layout, visualization of planning and control chart / tools, coherence, grammatical accuracy, tone, and style of the work submitted. Correct and consistent Harvard format referencing where appropriate. Quality of the arguments / reflection put forward: Consistently thorough, deep and extensive knowledge and understanding to identify the appropriate planning and control tool to support the points made. Outstanding level of logical justification for selecting a control tool. Very high level and sound understanding on the application scenario and related operational benefits of the proposed planning and control tools within the chosen organization. Evidence of high degree of almost complete autonomy and independent judgement on core theories of OM. |
|
70 – 79 (A3)
Excellent Very much exceeds threshold standard for a pass |
Quality of the Presentation: Excellent level of clarity, design layout, visualization of planning and control chart / tools, coherence, grammatical accuracy, tone, and style of the work submitted. Correct and consistent Harvard format referencing where appropriate. Quality of the arguments / reflection put forward: Consistently thorough, deep and extensive knowledge and understanding to identify the appropriate planning and control tool to support the points made. Excellent justification for selecting a control tool. Original and/or Very high level and sound understanding on the application scenario and related operational benefits of the proposed planning and control tools within the chosen organization. High degree of autonomy and independent judgement on core theories of OM |
|
60 – 69 (B1) Very good Well above threshold standard for a pass |
Quality of the Presentation: Very good level of clarity, design layout, visualization of planning and control chart / tools, coherence, grammatical accuracy, tone, and style of the work submitted. Correct and consistent Harvard format referencing where appropriate. Quality of the arguments / reflection put forward: Consistently very good knowledge and understanding to identify the appropriate planning and control tool to support the points made. Very good justification for selecting a control tool. High ability in the application scenario and related operational benefits of the proposed planning and control tools within the chosen organization. Significant level of autonomy and independent judgement on core theories of OM. |
|
50 – 59 (B2) Good Above threshold standard for a pass |
Quality of the Presentation: Good level of clarity, design layout, visualization of planning and control chart / tools, coherence, grammatical accuracy, tone, and style of the work submitted. Correct but with little inconsistent Harvard format referencing where appropriate. Quality of the arguments / reflection put forward: Generally good knowledge and understanding to identify the appropriate planning and control tool to support the points made. Good justification for selecting a control tool. Good ability in the application scenario and related operational benefits of the proposed planning and control tools within the chosen organization. |
|
40 – 49 (C) Basic competence Meets threshold standard for a pass |
Quality of the Presentation: Basic level of clarity, design layout, visualization of planning and control chart / tools, coherence, grammatical accuracy, tone, and style of the work submitted. Correct but with some inconsistent Harvard format referencing where appropriate. Quality of the arguments / reflection put forward: Satisfactory knowledge and understanding to identify the appropriate planning and control tool to support the points made. Basic knowledge and justification for selecting a control tool. Basic competence in the application scenario and related operational benefits of the proposed planning and control tools within the chosen organization. |
|
30 – 39 (D) Does not meet threshold standard for a pass |
Quality of the Presentation: Marginally low / poor level of clarity, design layout, visualization of planning and control chart / tools, coherence, grammatical accuracy, tone, and style of the work submitted. Incorrect and inconsistent Harvard format referencing where appropriate. Quality of the arguments / reflection put forward: Unsatisfactory /poor knowledge and understanding to identify the appropriate planning and control tool to support the points made. Limited/poor knowledge and justification for selecting a control tool. Limited/poor competence in the application scenario and related operational benefits of the proposed planning and control tools within the chosen organization. |
|
1– 29 (E) Well below threshold standard for a pass |
Quality of the Presentation: Very poor level of clarity, design layout, visualization of planning and control chart / tools, coherence, grammatical accuracy, tone, and style of the work submitted. Incorrect and inconsistent Harvard format referencing where appropriate. Quality of the arguments / reflection put forward: Very poor knowledge and understanding to identify the appropriate planning and control tool to support the points made. Very limited/poor knowledge and justification for selecting a control tool. Very limited/poor competence in the application scenario and related operational benefits of the proposed planning and control tools within the chosen organization |
| 0 (N) | There is no work to be assessed at first diet, or there is incomplete or no engagement with re-assessment |
|
No work to asses |
|
L1: Demonstrate a critical understanding of the functional role of operations in an organisation and its strategic importance.
Let's Book Your Work with Our Expert and Get High-Quality Content
sdf
