OPERATIONS IMPROVEMENT PLAN - Australia Assignments

8004OMGT Rubric
©Australian Institute of Business Term 2 2023 1

ASSESSMENT 2: OPERATIONS IMPROVEMENT PLAN

Key Components	High Distinction 100–85%	Distinction 84–75%	Credit 74–65%	Pass 64–50%	Fail 49–0%
Criterion 1: Describe the selected operational management process (or operation or supply network) and key characteristics. Present a process or network map to support your description. 20%	The selected process (or operation or network) and its key characteristics are expertly and comprehensively described. Process or network map is precise, clearly presented with accurate detail, and complements the outlined operational process.	The selected process (or operation or network) and its key characteristics are clearly and comprehensively described. Process or network map is clearly presented with accurate detail and complements the outlined operational process.	The selected process (or operation or network) and its key characteristics are clearly described, but may lack details in places. Process or network map is clearly presented but may contain irrelevant detail.	The selected process (or operation or network) and its key characteristics are described, but omits fundamental detail in places. Process or network map is presented, but several aspects may be irrelevant or incorrect.	Insufficient or no description of selected process (or operation or network). Insufficient or no key characteristics identified. Insufficient or no process or network map presented.
Criterion 2: Advanced understanding of operations management principles, frameworks, and contemporary topics. 30%	Demonstrates an expert, highly integrated understanding of required operations management principles, frameworks, and contemporary topics, with the capacity to synthesise numerous and diverging perspectives into broader discussion.	Demonstrates advanced understanding of required operations management principles, frameworks, and contemporary topics, with some discussion of alternative perspectives.	Demonstrates understanding of required operations management principles, frameworks, and contemporary topics, but may lack clarity and depth	Demonstrates an emerging understanding of some operations management principles, frameworks, but limited to fundamental descriptions and or lacks detail, and clarity	Demonstrates insufficient or no understanding operations management principles and frameworks.
Criterion 3: Application of principles, frameworks, and contemporary topics to develop well-justified, practical, and innovative recommendations.	Expert application and integration of principles, frameworks, and contemporary topics to develop well-justified, practical, and innovative recommendations. Recommendations are appropriate and well	Advanced application and integration of principles, frameworks, and contemporary topics to develop well-justified and practical recommendations. Recommendations are well customised to suit the organisational settings.	Application of some principles, frameworks, and contemporary topics to develop justified recommendations. Recommendations are appropriate to the organisational settings, but may lack depth and clarity in places.	Demonstrates emerging ability to apply principles, frameworks and contemporary topics to develop recommendations. Some aspects of recommendations are appropriate to the organisational settings,	Insufficient or no application of principles, frameworks and/or contemporary topics to develop recommendations. Insufficient or no recommendations.

Key Components	High Distinction 100–85%	Distinction 84–75%	Credit 74–65%	Pass 64–50%	Fail 49–0%
40%	customised to suit the organisational settings.	however alternative strategies are more suitable.
Criterion 4 Communication, structure, and language. 5%	Excellent communication style and the assessment is presented in a completely logical structure. All conventions of written English grammar, punctuation, and spelling are followed.	Sound communication style and the assessment is presented in a mostly logical structure. Most conventions of written English grammar, punctuation, and spelling are followed.	Good communication style and the assessment is presented in a reasonably logical structure. Very few errors with respect to grammar, punctuation, and/or spelling are evident.	Functional communication style and the assessment is presented in a fairly logical structure Noticeable errors in written English grammar, punctuation, and/or spelling impede clarity in places.	Overall, communication style is inappropriate to the task. The assessment structure is not logical and/or do not meet the task requirements. Errors in written English grammar, punctuation and/or spelling frequently and significantly impede meaning.
Criterion 5 In-text citations and referencing 5%	Author-date referencing style is consistent with the AIB Style Guide. All sources are acknowledged. Selection and use of sources add compelling value to the analysis and show extensive reading in the topic. The required number of references is used.	Author-date referencing style is consistent with the AIB Style Guide. Most sources are acknowledged. Selection and use of sources add significant value to the analysis and show wider reading in the topic. The required number of references is used.	Author-date referencing is mostly consistent the AIB Style Guide, but there are a few inconsistencies with punctuation. Most sources are acknowledged. Selection and use of sources adds value to the analysis. The required number of references is used.	Shows some control over author-date referencing as per the AIB Style Guide, but with some noticeable inconsistencies. Some sources are acknowledged. Some sources do not add value to the analysis. The required number of references is used.	Insufficient or no application of author-date referencing as per the AIB Style Guide. Very few or no sources are acknowledged. All/most sources are not credible or scholarly and their use adds little value to the analysis. Fewer than the required number of references is used.