Assignment
Date for Submission: Please refer to the timetable on ilearn
(The submission portal on ilearn will close at 14:00 UK time on the date of submission)
Page 1 of 8
[ARU 90]
Assignment Brief
As part of the formal assessment for the programme you are required to submit a Management in IT assignment. Please refer to your Student Handbook for full details of the programme assessment scheme and general information on preparing and submitting assignments.
Learning Outcomes:
After completing the module, you should be able to:
- Demonstrate understanding of the different possible staffing approaches for an IT Department
- Critically appraise the role of the strategic planning process and the IT Manager’s role within it.
- Prepare and evaluate as a group a staffing policy and plan for an IT Department.
- Produce an evaluation of the impact of new technology on an organization’s strategic plan.
Your assignment should include: a title page containing your student number, the module name, the submission deadline and a word count; the appendices if relevant; and a reference list in Arden University (AU) Harvard format. You should address all the elements of the assignment task listed below. Please note that tutors will use the assessment criteria set out below in assessing your work.
Maximum word count: 3,000 words
Please note that exceeding the word count will result in a reduction in grade proportionate to the number of words used in excess of the permitted limit.
Assignment Task
(SELF-SELECT) CASE STUDY
To make this assignment (and thus the module) more relevant and interesting for you, rather than give all students the same fixed (and artificial) case study, you will select your own realworld case study and then apply the concepts and techniques you have learned from this module to that case study.
IMPORTANT: The case study you select must not have been used by you, or any other student, in any other module – current or historic. Your chosen case study must be original and unique to you and this present assignment. Do not recycle.
Question 1 (Case Study Selection & Description)
- Select an industry, market sector or area of life that really interests you. It does not matter what you choose – as long as you are genuinely interested in it. It could be from any area of commercial life, the charity and voluntary sector, sport, leisure and hobbies or some aspect of government or public service. Document why you have picked a particular area – is it because you work in that sector? Is your hobby linked to that sector? Are you seeking to enter employment in that sector? Etc. Justify the selection.
- Within your chosen area or sector, select ONE real-world organisation – it could be a profit-seeking private company, a charity or voluntary group, a sporting team or a public-sector agency like some aspect of the emergency services or a local or central government department or agency. Again, explain why you have chosen it.
- Write a brief description of this chosen organisation. What do they do? Where are they based? What products, services and markets are they involved with?
- Provide the web address of this organisation so that the marker can follow it up and, to add visual appeal, include a screenshot of their home page.
While their website and other online sources will give you a very good idea of what the organisation actually does, you may have to use your imagination to fill in some missing bits in order to answer the remainder of the tasks in this assignment. This is not a problem – just fully document your own assumptions and fully reference any third-party sources that you have used to get additional background information.
In short, start the assignment by clearly and fully introducing your selected case study so that the marker can fully understand your subsequent work and thus ensure that you get maximum credit for all your hard work.
(20%)
Question 2 (Recruitment & Retention)
(Covers LO 1)
Advise the company board of your chosen case study on the types of IT skill sets likely to be required to satisfy the strategic aims of the company and, bearing in mind the financial implications of acquiring such skill sets, where to source such talent. Offer them at least two options. In your deliberations, you should be mindful of recruitment and motivation issues and, something of particular concern to any board, the identification and development of leadership skills within the IT function.
(20%)
Question 3 (Software)
(Covers LO 3)
The board are likely not to be IT specialists and are thus seeking your advice on what software options are available to satisfy their long-term aims. They specifically need guidance on:
- Options to unify & streamline their support functions
- Options to unify & streamline operational functions
- Options to centrally aggregate data and thus extract strategic insights • Options to optimise & secure their internal and external interfaces
For each aspect you should clearly explain the strengths and weaknesses of each suggestion, whether that be technical, financial, logistical or otherwise.
(20%)
Question 4 (Strategic Planning & Monitoring)
(Covers LO 4)
The development and implementation of the proposed unified IT solution, as the means to satisfying the company’s strategic aims, will necessitate the roll-out of a substantial project. Advise the board on:
- Who the key stakeholders will be and their various roles?
- How the budgetary aspects can be controlled and planned?
- What are the associated risks and how they can be managed?
- How a project manager may monitor progress of the IT roll-out?
(20%)
Question 5 (IT Management & ITIL)
(Covers LO 2)
Explain to the board the role of the IT Manager in the planning and execution of the IT rollout and the subsequent management of the upgraded IT Department and new IT systems once that roll-out is successfully completed. You should comment upon the role ITIL will play in this process.
(20%)
Practical Points & Hints:
- This is an individual assignment, but it will require collaboration with your module colleagues via the iLearn Learning Forum. You MUST supply screenshots of your postings (and your replies to other people’s postings) in an appendix to your main report. ONLY SUBMIT A SINGLE DOCUMENT.
- For each question, supplement the learning materials presented in the MIT module with your own private research (fully referenced) and try and introduce suitable (well annotated) diagrams if you feel that they would enhance your narrative.
- It would also be a good idea to research and comment upon existing commercial solutions to the problems presented here.
- A good assignment will display knowledge of the MIT module content, provide hard evidence of active forum contributions, wider reading and research – both theory and commercial – and address the specific problems highlighted in this case study. Additional credit will be given for full and well documented references, well-presented diagrams and concise, neatly formatted discussion.
Formative Feedback
You have the opportunity to submit ONE draft to receive formative feedback. The feedback is designed to help you develop areas of your work and it helps you develop your skills as an independent learner. Your work must be submitted to your tutor, on or before two weeks prior to the assessment submission date. This is to allow time for you to reflect on the feedback and draft your final submission. Formative feedback will not be given to work submitted after the above date.
Guidelines:
You MUST underpin your analysis and evaluation of the key issues with appropriate and wide ranging academic research and ensure this is referenced using the BU Harvard system. The My Study Skills Area contains the following useful resources; Study Skills Guide (containing a BU Harvard Referencing section) and a Harvard Referencing Interactive Tutorial. You must use the BU Harvard Referencing method in your assignment.
Additional notes:
Students are required to indicate the exact word count on the title page of the assessment.
The word count excludes the title page, tables, figures, diagrams, footnotes, reference list and appendices. Where assessment questions have been reprinted from the assessment brief these will also be excluded from the word count. ALL other printed words ARE included in the word count See ‘Word Count Policy’ on the homepage of this module for more information.
Assignments submitted late will not be accepted and will be marked as a 0% fail.
Your assessment should be submitted as a single Word (MS Word) or PDF file. For more information, please see the “Guide to Submitting an Assignment” document available on the module page on iLearn.
You must ensure that the submitted assignment is all
your own work and that all sources used are correctly attributed. Penalties
apply to assignments which show evidence of academic unfair practice. (See the
Student Handbook which is on the homepage of your module and also in the
Induction Area).
Assessment Criteria (Learning objectives covered – all)
| Level 6 is characterised by an expectation of students’ increasing autonomy in relation to their study and developing skill sets. Students are expected to demonstrate problem solving skills, both theoretical and practical. This is supported by an understanding of appropriate theory; creativity of expression and thought based in individual judgement; and the ability to seek out, invoke, analyse and evaluate competing theories or methods of working in a critically constructive and open manner. Output is articulate, coherent and skilled in the appropriate medium, with some students producing original or innovative work in their specialism. | ||||
| Mark Bands | Outcome | Generic Learning Outcomes (GLOs) (Academic Regulations, Section 2) | ||
| Knowledge & Understanding | Intellectual (thinking), Practical, Affective and Transferable Skills | |||
| 90-100% | Achieves module outcome(s) related to GLO at this level | Exceptional information base exploring and analysing the discipline, its theory and ethical issues with extraordinary originality and autonomy. Work may be considered for publication by either RDI or the validating partner | Exceptional management of learning resources, with a higher degree of autonomy/exploration that clearly exceeds the assessment brief. Exceptional structure/accurate expression. Demonstrates intellectual originality and imagination. Exceptional team/practical/professional skills. Work may be considered for publication by either RDI or the validating partner | |
| 80-89% | Outstanding information base exploring and analysing the discipline, its theory and ethical issues with clear originality and autonomy | Outstanding management of learning resources, with a degree of autonomy/exploration that clearly exceeds the assessment brief. An exemplar of structured/accurate expression. Demonstrates intellectual originality and imagination. Outstanding team/practical/professional skills | ||
| 70-79% | Excellent knowledge base that supports analysis, evaluation and problem-solving in theory/practice/ethics of discipline with considerable originality | Excellent management of learning resources, with degree of autonomy/research that may exceed the assessment brief. Structured and creative expression. Very good academic/ intellectual skills and practical/team/professional/problem-solving skills | ||
| 60-69% | Good knowledge base that supports analysis, evaluation and problem-solving in theory/ practice/ethics of discipline with some originality | Good management of learning resources, with consistent self-directed research. Structured and accurate expression. Good academic/intellectual skills and team/practical/ professional/problem solving skills | ||
| 50-59% | Satisfactory knowledge base that supports some analysis, evaluation and problem-solving in theory/practice/ethics of discipline | Satisfactory management of learning resources. Some autonomy in research but inconsistent. Structured and mainly accurate expression. Acceptable level of academic/ intellectual skills going beyond description at times. Satisfactory team/practical/professional/problem-solving skills | ||
| 40-49% | A marginal pass in module outcome(s) related to GLO at this level | Basic knowledge base with some omissions at the level of theoretical/ethical issues. Restricted ability to discuss theory and/or or solve problems in discipline | Basic use of learning resources with little autonomy. Some difficulties with academic/intellectual skills. Some difficulty with structure/accuracy in expression, but evidence of developing team/practical/professional/problemsolving skills |
Page 7 of 8
[ARU 90]
| 30-39% | A marginal fail in module outcome(s) related to GLO at this level. Possible compensation. Satisfies qualifying mark | Limited knowledge base. Limited understanding of discipline/ethical issues. Difficulty with theory and problem solving in discipline | Limited use of learning resources. Unable to work autonomously. Little input to teams. Weak academic/ intellectual skills. Still mainly descriptive. General difficulty with structure/accuracy in expression. Practical/professional/ problem-solving skills that are not yet secure | |
| 20-29% | Fails to achieve module outcome(s) related to this GLO. Qualifying mark not satisfied. No compensation available | Little evidence of knowledge base. Little evidence of understanding of discipline/ethical issues. Significant difficulty with theory and problem solving in discipline | Little evidence of use of learning resources. Unable to work autonomously. Little input to teams. Very weak academic/ intellectual skills. Work significantly descriptive. Significant difficulty with structure/accuracy in expression. Little evidence of practical/professional/problem-solving skills | |
| 10-19% | Inadequate knowledge base. Inadequate understanding of discipline/ethical issues. Major difficulty with theory and problem solving in discipline | Inadequate use of learning resources. Unable to work autonomously. Inadequate input to teams. Extremely weak academic/intellectual skills. Work significantly descriptive. Major difficulty with structure/accuracy in expression. Inadequate practical/professional/ problem-solving skills | ||
| 1-9% | No evidence of knowledge base; no evidence of understanding of discipline/ethical issues. Total inability with theory and problem solving in discipline | No evidence of use of learning resources. Completely unable to work autonomously. No evidence of input to teams. No evidence of academic/intellectual skills. Work wholly descriptive. Incoherent structure/accuracy and expression. No evidence of practical/professional/ problem-solving skills | ||
| 0% | Awarded for: (i) non-submission; (ii) dangerous practice and; (iii) in situations where the student fails to address the assignment brief (e.g.: answers the wrong question) and/or related learning outcomes |
Page 8 of 8
[ARU 90]
