Module

Operations Management

Assignment
Title
Assignment
Type
Word Limit
Weighting

Supply Chain Management a link too far?

Submission
Date

31 of August 2016

Plagiarism

When submitting work for assessment, students should be aware

of the InterActive guidance and regulations concerning
plagiarism. All submissions should be your own, original work.
Additionally, you agree to the student honour code.

Individual Assignment
3,000 +/- 10%
100%

As a student of InterActive studying the CUC

Comprehensive MBA, I pledge to uphold an academic
honour code that supports serving and leading with strong
personal integrity. Specifically, this includes not cheating or
using inappropriate or dishonest means in the completion
of academic requirements. This also includes not giving
unauthorised assistance to others. I understand that it is
my responsibility to comply with this honour system.
You must submit an electronic copy of your work. Your
submission will be electronically checked for plagiarism.

Citations

The APA referencing system, 6th edition, must be used. Please

note that Wikipedia is NOT a scholarly source and should not be
used in academic and scholarly papers or in discussion postings
as citation sources.

Learning
Outcomes

1. Develop an understanding of how operations can provide a

competitive advantage in the global marketplace
2. Understand the critical issues involved in the upfront planning of
an organisations operational design
3. Document and analyse business processes, procedures and
strategies to better manage quality issues
4. Measure quality as it pertains to companys products and services
5. Learn strategies to efficiently manage on-going operational
activities
6. Understand the dynamics of supply chain management and the
drivers for outsourcing and vertical integration
7. Improve quantitative reasoning ability
8. Improve oral presentation skills

Marking
Criteria

MBA Marking Criteria for this assignment is available at the end of

this document.

Your Task

Based on an organisation you are familiar with and have

researched:
1. Critically analyse the organisations supply chain processes and
management from procurement to market.
2. Evaluate risk within the supply chain and make recommendations
how either backward reengineering or vertical integration would
strengthen relationships.
3. Evaluate Lean Synchronization as a technique within the context
of the organisation and make any recommendations for
improvement.

Guidelines

Please read all questions and information provided carefully.

Answer should be made in appropriate length keeping in view the
requirement of each question and total word counts allowed.
In addition, your assignment should demonstrate the following
qualities:
A critical appreciation of relevant literature and its use to support
argument, substantiate calculations and other aspects of the
assignment.
Taking ownership of the content, being prepared to debate and
argue a personal position, and providing evidence of evaluative
skills. A submission made up of extracts from published sources
that is descriptive or simply just theoretical regurgitation is not
acceptable. Your submission must have interpretation and
consideration of the challenges and issues of taking theory into
practice.
Logical flow of ideas and treatment; appropriate selection of real
world factors related to the companies under scrutiny.
Evidence of additional personal research, and the ability to
analyze material from a variety of appropriate relevant
perspectives.
Presentation, structure, appropriateness of methodology, breaking
into section headings/subheadings, tidiness.
Marks will be awarded for proper referencing and originality of
work. Also note that plagiarism is a serious offence and your
submission will be electronically checked.
Your report must be handed in electronically no later than given
date of submission.

Marking Criteria
Grading
Criteria
Generic skills:
communication
and
presentation

90-100%

80-89%

70-79%

60-69

Below 60%

Comprehensive
and correctly
structured
assessment.
Style of writing is
very fluent and
develops a
coherent and
logical argument.
Excellent
referencing.

Well-structured
report which
follows correct
format and
format with no
errors in
referencing.
Style of writing is
fluent. Good
referencing used
throughout to
support
arguments.

Good report in
most aspects but
suffers from
minor variations
in quality and the
layout contains
some
inadequacies.
Style of writing is
good with few
errors.
Referencing is
consistent.

An adequate
report in most
aspects but
suffers from
variations in
quality and the
layout is
poor/weak in
parts. Style of
writing is
sufficient in logic
and flow.
Referencing
needs improving.

Very poor report

which is
incorrectly
structured and
contains major
errors and
omissions. Style
of
writing lacks
coherence and
fluency. Poor
referencing.

Knowledge &
Understandin
g

Demonstrates
excellent
knowledge of
theory and
provides critical
theoretical
underpinning.
Very good
interpretations
and summarising
of main themes.

Wide range of
knowledge
demonstrated
and evidence of
good
understanding of
the topic and
identification of
inter-related
concepts.
Ability to
interpret and
summarise
succinctly.

Good range of
knowledge
demonstrated
with core
concepts and
some additional
research
demonstrated.
Good
understanding
displayed of the
topic.
Summary and
interpretation are
satisfactory.

Analysis

Excellent use of
theoretical and
conceptual
models to guide
analysis linked
with a critical
discussion of
main themes.
Deconstructs the
major themes
used in the
argument.

Very good use of

the theoretical
and conceptual
models with good
critical discussion
and application.
Good evidence of
deconstruction
and critical
thinking.

Synthesis/
Creativity/
Application

Logical
presentation of
themes with
appropriate
examples being
demonstrated.
Very good
demonstration of
synthesis. Models
have been
clearly applied to
the argument.

Very good
account of main
themes with
sound
application. Good
attempt at
applying models
to the argument.
Fairly good
attempt at
synthesising the
salient points.

Use of theory and

concepts have
been
appropriately
used and reintegrated into
the analysis to
support
observations.
Application could
be further
extended within
scope of the
topic.
A good level of
critical thinking
has been
displayed
throughout.
Good account of
main themes
with some
attempt at
application.
Limited evidence
of synthesis.

Evaluation

Shows clear
evidence of indepth critical
reflection and
evaluation of the
argument by
providing a
robust defence
of the opinions
presented in the
assessment.

Shows evidence
of critical
reflection and
evaluation and a
fairly cohesive
defence of the
argument

Shows good
evidence of
critical reflection
within and
contextualisation.

Adequate range
of knowledge
demonstrated
but weaknesses
in key areas.
Limited
knowledge or
exploration of
key concepts.
Some
understanding
displayed of the
topic.
Summary and
interpretation are
satisfactory.
Use of theory and
concepts limited
but relevant.
Application could
be improved and
there is a
tendency towards
description and
lacks use of
references to
support
arguments. Must
provide more
evidence of
deconstruction
and critical
thinking

Very poor range

of knowledge
demonstrated
and there are
major
weaknesses
evident in
interpretation
and
understanding.
No clear
interpretation of
main themes.

Adequate level
and recognition
of core themes
with some
attempt at
application. Little
evidence of
synthesis.

Very poor
account of main
themes with
little or no
application. No
links between
models and
argument.

Shows some
evidence of
critical reflection
that could have
been developed
further. Some
defence of
opinions
presented

Shows little or no
evidence of
critical reflection
and needs to be
much more
developed. There
is no defence of
the opinions
presented.

Very poor use of

theory and very
little application
of concepts.
Very little
description with
not much
evidence of
analysis.