MIS712 – eBusiness Strategies
T1, 2017
Assessment 2 – Strategic Direction (Individual Case Study)
DUE DATE AND TIME: Week 9, Sunday 14 May 2017, 11:55 PM
PERCENTAGE OF FINAL GRADE: 40%
HURDLE DETAILS: Not applicable
Learning Outcome Details
Unit Learning Outcome (ULO) Graduate Learning Outcome (GLO)
ULO 1: present an advanced, integrated analysis and evaluation of eBusiness strategies in written form GLO1: Discipline-specific knowledge and capabilities
GLO2: Communication
ULO 2: apply knowledge of key concepts and theories in eBusiness Strategies to real life examples and case studies GLO1: Discipline-specific knowledge and capabilities
GLO5: Problem solving
Assessment Feedback
Students who submit their work by the due date will receive their marks and feedback on CloudDeakin on Sunday 4 June 2017, 11:55 PM.
Description / Requirements
Overview of Assignments 1 and 2
Please refer to T1 2017 MIS712 Assessment 1.doc for detail.
Assignment 2 requirements – Strategic Direction
The Assignment 2 report will be 2,500 words.
Given the findings of the analysis phase in Assignment 1, write a Strategy Recommendation report on the proposed new strategic changes that the company would benefit from.
Structure
• Executive Summary
• Current Strategies Assessment– given the analysis conducted in Assignment 1, provide a succinct overview of the current positioning of the company.
• New Strategies – the benefits of the proposed changes must be clearly justified in terms of the appropriateness, and the tangible and intangible benefits, for the organisation and its customers. This will require researching the solutions so you can determine any changes to the firm’s current direction, practices and processes.
• Recommendation – recommend a course of action that is the most critical in view of the objectives established for the new direction (next 6 months).
• References - references and citations showing the source of all the information in the report need to be provided (Harvard referencing style). The references used must demonstrate thorough research using quality references such as journal articles, industry reports, etc. with good evidence to support the strategic direction recommended. Details on referencing can be found at:
http://www.deakin.edu.au/current-students/study-support/study-skills/handouts/ideas.php
Use one (1) of the following as a structured approach to present the new strategy direction for the organisation:
• the Roadmap for e-Business strategy implementation (chapter 13 of the textbook), or
• the Business Model Canvas, where more information can be found at:
o https://strategyzer.com/canvas/business-model-canvas
o https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Model_Canvas
The following sections provide a summary of what each approach looks like.
Roadmap for e-Business strategy implementation (Jelassi, T, Enders, A, &Martínez-López, FJ 2014, Strategies for e-business : creating value through electronic and mobile commerce : concept and cases, Harlow Pearson, 2014, p. 301)
Business Model Canvas
https://strategyzer.com/canvas/business-model-canvas
Submission Instructions
The report must be one (1) single file, named T1_year_MIS712_surname_assign2 (e.g. T1_2017_MIS712_Liang_ assign2).
You must keep a backup copy of every assignment you submit, until the marked assignment has been returned to you. In the unlikely event that one of your assignments is misplaced, you will need to submit your backup copy.
Any work you submit may be checked by electronic or other means for the purposes of detecting collusion and/or plagiarism.
When you are required to submit an assignment through your CloudDeakinunit site, you will receive an email to your Deakin email address confirming that it has been submitted. You should check that you can see your assignment in the Submissions view of the Assignment dropbox folder after upload, and check for, and keep, the email receipt for the submission.
Submit the report in the folder called T1 2017 MIS712 Assignment 2 Strategic Direction.
Notes
• Penalties for late submission:The following marking penalties will apply if you submit an assessment task after the due date without an approved extension: 5% will be deducted from available marks for each day up to five days, and work that is submitted more than five days after the due date will not be marked. You will receive 0% for the task. 'Day' means working day for paper submissions and calendar day for electronic submissions. The Unit Chair may refuse to accept a late submission where it is unreasonable or impracticable to assess the task after the due date.
• For more information about academic misconduct, special consideration, extensions, and assessment feedback, please refer to the documentYour rights and responsibilities as a student in this Unitin the first folder next to the Unit Guide of the Resources area in the CloudDeakin unit site.
• Building evidence of your experiences, skills and knowledge (Portfolio) - Building a portfolio that evidences your skills, knowledge and experience will provide you with a valuable tool to help you prepare for interviews and to showcase to potential employers. There are a number of tools that you can use to build a portfolio. You are provided with cloud space through OneDrive, or through the Portfolio tool in the Cloud Unit Site, but you can use any storage repository system that you like.Remember that a Portfolio is YOUR tool. You should be able to store your assessment work, reflections, achievements and artefacts in YOUR Portfolio. Once you have completed this assessment piece, add it to your personal Portfolio to use and showcase your learning later, when applying for jobs, or further studies. Curate your work by adding meaningful tags to your artefacts that describe what the artefact represents.
Rubric
Assignment 2 will be marked out of 100 (and then converted to a mark out of 40 towards the final unit result) using the following feedback/assessment rubric criteria and standards.
GLOs High Distinction Distinction Credit Pass Fail
GLO1&5
Current Strategy Assessment
(out of 20) Outstanding (very specific, detailed, expert) overview of the analysis. Outstanding use of concept/theories to expertly justify the benefits/shortcomings of current direction. Mostly advanced (very specific, detailed, expert) overview of the analysis. Mostly advanced use of concept/theories to justify very well the benefits/shortcomings of current direction. Good overview of the analysis, but lacking depth in places. Good use of concept/ theories to communicate well the benefits/shortcomings of current direction, but needs not consistently well justified. Adequate overview of the analysis, but is somewhat generic. Adequate use of concept/theories and discussion of benefits/shortcomings of current strategy, but is somewhat unclear or not justified in many places. Report demonstrates little/no knowledge or strategy concepts/ theories. Clearly there is a limited knowledge of the organisation.
GLO1&5
New Strategy proposal and justification.
Quality of Recommendation
(out of 50)
Outstanding clarity of applied strategic thinking. The new strategy is discussed in depth, there is an excellent justification of projected benefits. Actionable plan of action is creative, detailed and firmly based in both analysis of the company and various environmental factors. Mostly demonstrates advanced clarity of applied strategic thinking. The new strategy is very well discussed, and mostly excellent justification of projected benefits. Actionable plan of action is detailed and firmly based in both analysis of the company and various environmental factors. Good evidence of applied strategic thinking. The new strategy is well discussed with projected benefits justified. Good grasp of using analytical findings to forge a clear and actionable plan of action. But the report is not consistent throughout for one or more these areas. Adequate evidence of applied strategic thinking, but too generic in application. The new strategy is discussed, however, the justification of projected benefits is not convincing. Very little evidence of strategic thinking. There are no or limited elements of a new strategy, and/or there is very little value in the proposal.
GLO2 Clarity of written argument (out of 30) Expert (clear, concise, convincing, logical flow) argument used throughout the report. Mostly expert (clear, concise, convincing, logical flow) argument used throughout the report. Good argument through most of the report, but lacks clarity and brevity in a few places in the report, and/or sometimes does not flow in a logical manner. Adequate argument in the report, but mostly lacks clarity, brevity and/or logical flow in many places.
Inadequate argument in the report because it the argument is unclear, lacks flow and logic, and unnecessarily verbose.