OENG1115 Assessment Item 2: Innovation and Technology Management Report, an individual assessment Weighting of final grade: 50% Related course learning outcomes: 3 Due date: Week 13, Friday 3rd June, 11:59pm Assessment description: Based on the project concept, you will submit a report on your work integrating and applying key operational aspects of managing innovation and technology to a collaborative engineering project Assessment detail: Based on either project option 1 (Methane Production) or option 2 (Road Rail Grade Separation) you will prepare a detailed report for managing innovation and/or technology to deliver a specific and defendable operational outcome. You will: • Briefly research and outline a specific technology and/or an innovation that would benefit the project if successfully integrated. • Describe the value proposition (a succinct business case including key risks and their mitigation) underpinning why the project management team should consider proceeding with your technology / innovation approach as opposed to doing nothing or evaluating other concepts. • Outline a detailed strategy based on sound theoretical reasoning for sourcing / developing the technology or innovation and for its integration / commercialization. You will also consider the longer term management of the technology / innovation within the project if appropriate. • Consider implications of intellectual property and its management • Consider organisational culture and key stakeholders (internal and external), supply chains if/as relevant and communication strategies. Your report will include a: • Clear description of the objective • Summary of the technology / innovation you have researched for the project • Defendable value proposition for the technology / innovation you have down selected • Detailed strategy / process to source through to reliably integrate the technology or innovation including consideration of project specific constraints, standards and codes, on-going management as relevant. • Intellectual property assessment and strategy if applicable • Communications plan for engaging internal and external stakeholders • Discussion over organisational culture relevant to the technology / innovation proposed • Detailed references to support your approach You may wish to consider the Heilmeier Questions covered in Lectures to assist your thinking. Report length: The report will be at least 1500 words in length (excluding images, tables, graphs and captions thereof) with a maximum of 2500 words. Assessment criteria: See 'Assessment Overview' document also provided on Blackboard. Assessment rubric: Criterion Fail (NN) Pass (PA) Credit (CR) Distinction (DI) High Distinction (HD) Insight (20%) No or limited interpretation, analysis or scholarly input Minimal interpretation, analysis, and depth of thinking other than what was presented in lectures or cursory web browsing Some interpretation, analysis and depth of thinking over and above lecture materials and readings Significant interpretation, analysis and depth of thinking. Useful conclusions and approaches Exceeds expectations in terms of interpretation, analysis and depth of thinking, novel and insightful conclusions and approaches Content (40%) Nil or minimal effort, does not attain requirement, off topic Meets minimal requirements for content, on topic but gaps, basic input of information Meets requirements for content, some original content Meets requirements for content, significant original contributions Exceeds requirements, significant original content throughout Structure (10%) Nil or disorganised structure Structure is sufficient to express content, ideas are often present in a disorganised manner Content is generally organised logically, some elements need attention Structure is sound and supports logical exposition Outstanding presentation of materials that supports all requirements Evidence & Referencing (20%) Little or no evidence to support content, copied materials with no citations Minimal referencing and support provided, inconsistent citation style Most points are supported by evidence with citation generally appropriate and consistent Excellent integration of evidence into the work, often primary sources used, citations and referencing appropriate and consistent Outstanding integration of significant research efforts to support arguments. Primary sources used appropriately and consistently Mechanics (10%) Layout and logic is confusing, language is poor, spelling and grammar mistakes Layout and logic is adequate some issues with grammar and spelling Overall presentation of report is easy to digest and language appropriate Very good presentation of content, easy and interesting to read and digest Excellent presentation of content, interesting and insightful, easy to digest and read