Leveraging IT for Business Advantage

134 views 8:30 am 0 Comments June 6, 2023
HOLMES
INSTITUTE
FACULTY OF
HIGHER
EDUCATION
UNDERGRADUATE
PROGRAM
Assessment Details and Submission Guidelines
Trimester 2023
Unit Code HI6032
Unit Title Leveraging IT for Business Advantage
Assessment Type Group Assignment
Assessment Title Group Presentation and Case Study
Purpose of the
assessment (with
ULO Mapping)		 Each group will be allocated a topic and will prepare a presentation to discuss the topic
associated issues and trends.
1. Critically evaluate how technology can enable an organisation’s core business
processes and support the strategic goals.
2. Analyse and comprehend the issues that arise with the acquisition and adoption
of technology and recommend possible solutions.
3. Critically evaluate the ways in which information technology can contribute to
organisational innovation, efficiency and overall corporate performance.
4. Critically analyse and evaluate the key issues, challenges and opportunities
associated with the latest developments in Information Systems.
Weight 50% of the total assessments (2 components)
Total Marks 50
Word limit 1500 words (case study)
Due Date •
• Case study (20%): Week 12 Friday 5pm
Group video presentation and slides (30%):
Group Video presentation and Slides: Week 11 Friday 5pm
Submission
Guidelines		 • All work must be submitted on Blackboard by the due date along with a completed
Assignment Cover Page.
• The case study must be in MS Word format, 1.5 line spacing, 12-pt Times New
Roman font and 2 cm margins on all four sides of your page with appropriate
section headings.
• Reference sources must be cited in the text of the report, and listed appropriately
at the end in a reference list using Harvard style.

HI6032 Assignment 2 – Group Presentation and Case Study
Page 2 of 7
Assignments 2 Group Presentation and Case StudyLearners Assessment Guide
Objective(s)
This assessment item relates to the unit learning outcomes as in the Unit of Study Guide. This assessment is
designed to enhance students’ skills in cooperation in a group environment on critically analyzing and
evaluating key issues and challenges in recent IS technologies and how they can be acquired and contribute
to business core processes. The assessment helps develop presentation and problem-solving skills, and an
ability to work in groups
Instructions
For this assignment students will be divided into small groups (the size will depend on class size), and each
group will be given a specific technology/ topic to research. Each group will first be required to prepare a
Additionally, if this unit of study is running in block mode (compressed mode) then time will be further limited.
Thus conditions may change depending on the mode. In standard mode, student may be given latitude to
form their own groups, however in compressed mode, groups may be randomly assigned as there will be little
time before the first presentations are due.
Points to Note:
• The assignment is worth 50% of the assessment divided into the two components
o o
The case study: 20%
••
The presentation should be for approximately 20 minutes
•••
The case study is due for submission on the Friday of Week 12.
• If you miss your group presentation, your slides will be graded zero.
set of slides and a video presentation on this topic which they will upload on Friday of week 11
Each group will then be required to research a real-life company and write a case study. The case study must be directly .
relevant to the group presentation
The video presentation and slides: 30%
Each group should select a member to make the video presentation on behalf of the group
The video presentation and slides are due for submission on the Friday of week 11
HI6032 Assignment 2 – Group Presentation and Case Study
Page 3 of 7
The Key elements of the case study
From a broad perspective, a case study is an in-depth analysis of a particular subject. Generally, the study
covers a problem-solution-results format. When applied to this unit, a case study examines how a real-life
company had a problem, found a solution using a particular information technology, and shares the results of
the solution.
The following eight elements must be included in your case study:
1. Executive Summary/Synopsis
2. Introduction
o introduce the selected company, including the background and any previous studies of the
issue (literature review); briefly describe the key problem and its significance
3. Challenges
o explain the challenge the selected company faced before using the presented technology;
4. Discussion
o discuss how the selected company found the presented technology; discuss the selected
company’s decision process and the steps they went through before discovering the solution
5. Implementation
o explain how the solution was implemented; discuss if the implementation meets the
expectations, and who was involved in the implementation process
6. Conclusion
o conclude your case study with the end results; sum up the main points from the challenges,
discussion and recommendations
7. Recommendations
o provide proposals for future action to solve the problem or improve the situation
8. References
Note on Group Work
As this is a group assignment, by default all members of the group will receive the same grade. However, this
is assuming that all members of the group contribute equally. If during the course of the assignment a group
member is not contributing their fair share of work, for whatever reason, the group should contact their unit
coordinator or tutor as soon as possible. Arrangements will then be made to grade each member differently
based on input to the project. If the group is satisfied with the level of input from each member, then there
is no need to contact the unit coordinator or tutor. In the absence of any advice from the group members on
such matters, all members will receive the same final grade.
It may be possible that the unit coordinator or tutor will decide to grade the group members differently
based on their own observations of contact, file sharing and messaging within the group folder.
HI6032 Assignment 2 – Group Presentation and Case Study
Page 4 of 7
Group Presentation Marking Scheme

Group Presentation Marking Scheme
6 4 2 1 Mark
Visual Appeal There are no errors in spelling,
grammar and punctuation.
Information is clear and concise on
each slide.
Visually appealing/engaging.		 There are some errors in spelling,
grammar and punctuation. Too
much information on two or
more slides.
Significant visual appeal.		 There are many errors in spelling,
grammar and punctuation. Too much
information was contained on many
slides.
Minimal effort made to make slides
appealing or too much going on.		 There are many errors in spelling,
grammar and punctuation. The slides
were difficult to read and too much
information had been copied onto them.
No visual appeal.		 /6
Comprehension Extensive knowledge of topic.
Members showed complete
understanding of assignment.
Accurately answered all questions
posed.		 Most showed a good
understanding of topic.
All members able to answer most
of audience questions.		 Few members showed good
understanding of some parts of topic.
Only some members accurately
answered questions.		 Presenters didn’t understand topic.
Majority of questions answered by only
one member or majority of information
incorrect.		 /6
Presentation
Skills		 Regular/constant eye contact, the
audience was engaged, and
presenters held the audience’s
attention. Appropriate speaking
volume & body language.		 Most members spoke to
majority of audience; steady
eye contact. The audience
was engaged by the
presentation.
Majority of presenters spoke at a
suitable volume.
Some fidgeting by member(s).		 Members focused on only part of
audience. Sporadic eye contact by
more than one presenter.
The audience was distracted.
Speakers could be heard by only half
of the audience.
Body language was distracting.		 Minimal eye contact by more than one
member focusing on small part of
audience.
The audience was not engaged.
Majority of presenters spoke too quickly
or quietly making it difficult to
understand.
Inappropriate/disinterested body
language.		 /6
Content The presentation was a concise
summary of the topic with all
questions answered.
Comprehensive and complete
coverage of information.		 The presentation was a good
summary of the topic.
Most important information
covered; little irrelevant info.		 The presentation was informative but
several elements went unanswered.
Much of the information irrelevant;
coverage of some of major points.		 The presentation was a brief look at the
topic but many questions were left
unanswered.
Majority of information irrelevant and
significant points left out.		 /6
Preparedness/
Participation/
Group Dynamics		 All presenters knew the
information, participated
equally, and helped each other
as needed.
Extremely prepared and rehearsed.		 Slight domination of one
presenter.
Members helped each other.
Very well prepared.		 Significant controlling by some
members with one minimally
contributing.
Primarily prepared but with some
dependence on just reading off slides.		 Unbalanced presentation or tension
resulting from over-helping.
Multiple group members not
participating.
Evident lack of preparation/rehearsal.
Dependence on slides.		 /6

HI6032 Assignment 2 – Group Presentation and Case Study
Page 5 of 7
Case Study Marking Scheme

Criteria Missing or Unacceptable (0-39) Developing (40-49) Accomplished (50-74) Exemplary (75-100)
Introduction:
background, literature
review, references (5%)		 Incomplete research and
associations between the problems
or questions and key course
concepts and no use of
corroborating sources.		 Limited research and associations
between the problems or
questions and key course
concepts and little (1 or more)
use of corroborating sources.		 Good research and documented
associations between problems
or questions and key course
concepts and some (2 or more)
use of corroborating sources.		 Excellent research with clearly
documented associations
between problems or questions
and key course concepts and good
(3 or more) use of corroborating
sources.
Challenges:
identification of the
main issues and/or
problems (3%)		 Identifies and understands few of
the main issues in the case study.		 Identifies and understands some
of the main issues in the case
study.		 Identifies and understands most of
the main issues in the case study.		 Identifies and understands all the
main issues in the case study.
Discussion:
analysis of the key
issues. (3%)		 Incomplete analysis of the key issues. Insightful and thorough analysis
of some of the key issues.		 Insightful and thorough analysis of
most of the key issues.		 Insightful and thorough analysis of
all the key issues.
Implementation (3%) Limited description of the
implementation		 Adequate description of the
implementation		 Clear description of the
implementation		 Detailed description of the
implementation.
Recommendations and
conclusion (3%)		 Superficial observations and
recommendations on effective
solutions to a few of the
problems/issues. Limited conclusion		 Shallow observations and
recommendations on effective
solutions to
some of the problems/issues.
Adequate conclusion		 Solid, well-thought out
observations and
recommendations on effective
solutions to many of the
problems/issues. Appropriate
conclusions		 Well-reasoned, logical, relevant
observations and
recommendations on effective
solutions to
most of the problems/issues.
Detailed and appropriate
conclusions
Writing Skills (3%) There are many spelling errors
and grammatical mistakes. Ideas
are hard to follow. References
are not used.		 There are several spelling or
grammatical errors. Some ideas
are clearly presented.
References are sporadic or not
used.		 There are few spelling or
grammatical errors. Most ideas
are clearly presented and
references are used.		 Writing is totally free of grammar
and spelling errors. Clear,
concise and creative
presentation of ideas and
properly referenced.

HI6032 Assignment 2 – Group Presentation and Case Study
Page 6 of 7
Submission Guidelines
Your submission document should be a single word document containing your case study, and a PPT or pdf
document containing your slides.
WHAT IS NOT ACCEPTED:
The following submissions are not accepted and will be graded zero:
• Photos, screen shots or handwritten answers
• Emailed submissions
• Submission for a different assessment
• Submission for a different unit
• Submission not in Microsoft Word (case study)
• Submission without a name and Student ID Number
• Submission with a different student name / ID number listed (these submissions are treated as
academic misconduct and penalties may apply)
• Blank or empty documents
All submissions are to be submitted through the safeAssign facility in Blackboard. Submission boxes linked to
SafeAssign will be set up in the Units Blackboard Shell. Assignments not submitted through these submission
links will not be considered.
Submissions must be made by the due date and time (which will be in the session detailed above) and
determined by your unit coordinator. Submissions made after the due date and time will be penalized per
day late (including weekend days) according to Holmes Institute policies.
The SafeAssign similarity score will be used in determining the level, if any, of plagiarism. SafeAssign will check
conference web-sites, Journal articles, the Web and your own class members submissions for plagiarism.
You can see your SafeAssign similarity score (or match) when you submit your assignment to the appropriate
drop-box. If this is a concern you will have a chance to change your assignment and resubmit. However,
resubmission is only allowed prior to the submission due date and time. After the due date and time have
elapsed your assignment will be graded as late. Submitted assignments that indicate a high level of
plagiarism will be penalized according to the Holmes Academic Misconduct policy, there will be no
exceptions. Thus, plan early and submit early to take advantage of the resubmission feature. You can make
multiple submissions, but please remember we only see the last submission, and the date and time you
submitted will be taken from that submission.
Assessment Design – Adapted Harvard Referencing:
Holmes will be implementing as a pilot program a revised Harvard approach to referencing. The following
guidelines apply:
1. Reference sources in assignments are limited to sources which provide full text access to the
source’s content for lecturers and markers.
2. The Reference list should be located on a separate page at the end of the essay and titled:
References.
3. It should include the details of all the in-text citations, arranged alphabetically A-Z by author
surname. In addition, it MUST include a hyperlink to the full text of the cited reference source.
For example;
P Hawking, B McCarthy, A Stein (2004), Second Wave ERP Education, Journal of Information Systems
Education, Fall, http://jise.org/Volume15/n3/JISEv15n3p327.pdf
4. All assignments will require additional in-text reference details which will consist of the surname of
the author/authors or name of the authoring body, year of publication, page number of contents,
paragraph where the content can be found.
For example;
HI6032 Assignment 2 – Group Presentation and Case Study
Page 7 of 7
“The company decided to implement a enterprise wide data warehouse business intelligence
strategies (Hawking et al, 2004, p3(4)).”
Non-Adherence to Referencing Guidelines
Where students do not follow the above guidelines:
1. Students who submit assignments which do not comply with the guidelines will be asked to resubmit
their assignments.
2. Late penalties will apply, as per the Student Handbook each day, after the student/s have been
notified of the resubmission requirements.
3. Students who comply with guidelines and the citations are “fake” will be reported for academic
misconduct.
Academic Integrity
Holmes Institute is committed to ensuring and upholding Academic Integrity, as Academic Integrity is integral
to maintaining academic quality and the reputation of Holmes’ graduates. Accordingly, all assessment tasks
need to comply with academic integrity guidelines. Table 1 identifies the six categories of Academic Integrity
breaches. If you have any questions about Academic Integrity issues related to your assessment tasks, please
consult your lecturer or tutor for relevant referencing guidelines and support resources. Many of these
resources can also be found through the Study Sills link on Blackboard.
Academic Integrity breaches are a serious offence punishable by penalties that may range from deduction of
marks, failure of the assessment task or unit involved, suspension of course enrolment, or cancellation of
course enrolment.
Table 1: Six categories of Academic Integrity breaches

Plagiarism Reproducing the work of someone else without attribution. When
a student submits their own work on multiple occasions this is
known as self-plagiarism.
Collusion Working with one or more other individuals to complete an
assignment, in a way that is not authorised.
Copying Reproducing and submitting the work of another student, with or
without their knowledge. If a student fails to take reasonable
precautions to prevent their own original work from being copied,
this may also be considered an offence.
Impersonation Falsely presenting oneself, or engaging someone else to present as
oneself, in an in-person examination.
Contract cheating Contracting a third party to complete an assessment task,
generally in exchange for money or other manner of payment.
Data fabrication and
falsification		 Manipulating or inventing data with the intent of supporting false
conclusions, including manipulating images.

Source: INQAAHE, 2020

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,