{"id":12800,"date":"2023-09-25T00:56:44","date_gmt":"2023-09-25T00:56:44","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/essaybishops.com\/evaluating-delivery-practices-and-a-proposed-digital-transformation-at-consultantco\/"},"modified":"2023-09-25T00:56:44","modified_gmt":"2023-09-25T00:56:44","slug":"evaluating-delivery-practices-and-a-proposed-digital-transformation-at-consultantco","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/uk\/evaluating-delivery-practices-and-a-proposed-digital-transformation-at-consultantco\/","title":{"rendered":"Evaluating Delivery Practices and a Proposed Digital Transformation at ConsultantCo"},"content":{"rendered":"

MIS713 \u2013 Digital Transformation of Supply Chains – Trimester 2 2023
\nAssessment Task 1 \u2013 Part A – Case Study Report and Complex Diagrams;
\nPart B Feedback Reflection \u2013 Individual\/Group Assignment
\nDUE DATE AND TIME: Monday, 11 September, by 8:00pm (AEST)
\nPERCENTAGE OF FINAL GRADE: Part A (45%), Part B (5%)
\nWORD COUNT: Part A (2500 words, complex diagrams), Part B (500 words)
\nDescription
\nThis is an individual assessment. For the assessment, you will take the role of a consultant working for
\nConsultantCo. ConsultantCo is a company that provides consulting services in the field of supply chain
\nmanagement and digital transformation. ConsultanceCo assists clients in harnessing the potential of digital
\nsolutions to optimize their supply chain processes, improve decision-making, and gain a competitive edge in
\nthe market. The assessment involves you (as a consultant in ConsultantCo) applying digital transformation and
\nsupply chain management (SCM) knowledge (GLO1 Discipline-specific knowledge) to a company(client):
\n\u2022 reviewing a specified subset of the company\u2019s supply chain practices (GLO5 Problem Solving);
\n\u2022 evaluating a specified type of problem with the SCM practices and evaluating an associated digital
\ntransformation solution (GLO5 Problem Solving); and
\n\u2022 evaluating the social and\/or environmental responsibility with the SCM practices and the digital
\ntransformation solution (GLO8 Global Citizenship);
\n\u2022 building capacity to seek, interpret accurately and act upon feedback to improve problem solving skills
\n(GLO5 Problem Solving).
\nYou will source a client for ConsultantCo \u2013 either a unique company from a specified list provided that you will
\nresearch (option 1) or a real company you source and interview a manager\/staff (option 2). You will then
\nprepare a report to be evaluated by a senior consultant (i.e. a Deakin academic) of ConsultantCo. This is similar
\nto real consultancies where consultants\u2019 work is evaluated by senior consultants.
\nThe report is therefore not for the client. The report instead must meet the requirements expected by
\nConsultantCo. After you submit the assignment for evaluation (marking) by a senior consultant (Deakin
\nacademic), you can create a version of the report that meets the client\u2019s needs if desired (Option 2).
\nThe two parts of this single individual assignment are as follows:
\n\u2022 Part A \u2013 a Case Study Report comprising a text word limit of 2,500 addressing the requirements in
\nTable 1 below, plus at least one (1) complex diagram but more likely multiple smaller diagrams to aid
\nreadability. The report will detail the client\u2019s current supply chain activities, and evaluate a digital
\ntransformation solution (GLO1 Discipline-specific knowledge, GLO5 Problem Solving) and related
\nsocial\/environmental responsibility aspects (GLO8 Global Citizenship). The limit of 2,500 words in
\ntotal for Part A is very strict and cannot be exceeded by even one (1) word. You can decide how to
\nsplit these words between the Part A sections outlined in Table 1, which gives an optional guide.
\n\u2022 Part B \u2013 a Feedback Reflection Report (text word limit of 500, no diagrams) is a critique of the
\neffectiveness of how you sought and utilised feedback in the seminars and CloudDeakin discussion
\nfolders regarding your understanding of the Part A requirements to produce Part A. Effective use of
\nfeedback, and reflecting on your use, is a critical part of being an effective problem solver (GLO5).
\nPage 2 of 13
\nSpecific Requirements
\nPart A \u2013 Recording a company choice (Option 1) \/ selecting a company (Option 2)
\nThere are two options for selecting a company on which do write the Part A Case Study Report.
\nOption 1 involves selecting a unique company from a list of large (often multinational) companies not selected
\nby another student, which must only be selected from the list found under the Content tab, Assessment
\nResources, then Assessment 1, then Option 1 Company Selection Tool in the MIS713 CloudDeakin unit site.
\nInstructions\/steps on how to record your choice can be found under there. Only students who record a unique
\ncompany selection from the list using the Option 1 instructions can use that company. You will then research
\nthat company and its industry to meet the ConsultantCo requirements below. You can change the company
\n(up to the end of Week 3), but from the list provided and only if the new company has not already been
\nrecorded by another student.
\nOption 2 is for students who want to use a real company from any country which they do not own\/manage
\nand which no other student is using. Students cannot own\/manage the company, because GLO5 Problem
\nSolving requires interviewing a client including the owner\/manager. It cannot be the same company as another
\nstudent. It can be a company in which you work. Option 1 will have comparatively less workload because
\nOption 2 can be time-consuming (e.g. many owner\/managers might say no, interviewing takes time, etc).
\nOption 2 is therefore at the student\u2019s own risk (e.g. no extensions). The owner\/manager must sign a
\nconfirmation form (see Content tab, then Assessment Resources, then Assessment 1) before interviews can
\nstart. A franchise (e.g. pizza store) and a store\/department\/division run by a large company with different
\nowners\/managers will be considered different companies. Ask the owner\/manager if they have already signed
\nthe confirmation form for another student. If yes, you must select another company. If you have not finished
\nthe interviews\/confirmation by Week 3, you must change to Option 1 because you will be a high risk not
\ncompleting. Work on Option 1 in parallel as a back-up.
\nIn the assignment requirements below, the selected company (either Option 1 or Option 2) will be referred to
\nas \u201cthe client\u201d and will be considered as the company you have sourced for ConsultantCo.
\nPart A \u2013 ConsultantCo requirements for the Case Study Report
\nCase setting Introduction:
\nThe COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly affected supply chain management in unprecedented ways.
\nWith lockdowns and social distancing norms, consumer behaviour dramatically shifted to online
\npurchasing, triggering a tremendous surge in e-commerce. This sudden rise put immense pressure on
\nlogistics and delivery networks, compelling companies to rethink, upscale, and often overhaul their
\ndelivery capabilities.
\nAdditionally, supply chain disruptions became commonplace due to restrictions on movement and
\ntemporary closures of businesses. This led to irregular and unpredictable delivery timelines, pushing
\ncompanies to build more robust and resilient delivery systems. Operational changes were needed to
\nensure the safety of workers and customers, leading to the adaptation of contactless deliveries and
\nenhanced hygiene protocols.
\nThe pandemic, in many ways, has served as a wake-up call, prompting businesses to reconsider their
\ndelivery methods. They are now seeking strategies that limit carbon emissions, reduce waste, and
\npromote energy efficiency while ensuring resilient operations, thereby aiming for a balance between
\nmeeting increased demand and fostering environmental stewardship. Companies are therefore being
\ncompelled to design their delivery strategies with a focus on carbon neutrality, waste reduction, and
\nPage 3 of 13
\nenergy efficiency. The aim is to create supply chains that are not only resilient and efficient but also
\nresponsible and sustainable.
\nTechnological advancements, particularly in AI, have been pivotal in addressing these pandemicinduced sustainability challenges within delivery operations. AI-enhanced analytics have been
\ninstrumental in optimizing delivery routes for lower fuel consumption, thus reducing carbon footprint,
\na need highlighted due to the e-commerce boom during the pandemic. Likewise, AI-driven demand
\nforecasting has helped tackle the issue of overproduction and waste accentuated by fluctuating
\ndemand during COVID-19. The pandemic has also accelerated the development and adoption of
\nautonomous electric delivery solutions, such as drones and vehicles, which can lead to zero-emission
\ndeliveries. Thus, amid the profound changes brought on by the pandemic, technology, especially AI,
\nhas emerged as a key enabler in aligning the deliver tasks of supply chains with sustainability goals
\nwhile effectively managing the increased demand.
\nPart A \u2013 Case Study Report Instructions:
\nOverview
\nYour case study report should address the requirements outlined in Table 1. The word limit is strictly 2,500
\nwords \u2013 please note this cannot be exceeded by even a single word.
\nClient\u2019s Current Supply Chain Activities
\nBegin by detailing the client’s current supply chain activities, focusing on the deliver tasks. Discuss how these
\nactivities have been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. Make sure you address changes in consumer
\nbehaviour, supply chain disruptions, and modifications in delivery practices. Refer to your readings and class
\ndiscussions for examples and further insights.
\nDigital Transformation Solution Evaluation
\nEvaluate a digital transformation solution that the client has adopted to adapt to these changes and include
\ninformation about potential future changes to further mitigate the changes brought by the COVID-19
\npandemic. You may wish to focus on advanced technologies such as AI, considering its potential in route
\noptimization, demand forecasting, and other relevant areas. Explain how this solution could improve the
\nclient’s delivery capabilities in the face of ongoing challenges.
\nSocial\/Environmental Responsibility Aspects
\nDiscuss how the client’s supply chain activities and the proposed digital transformation solution align with
\nsocial and environmental responsibilities. Consider elements such as carbon emissions, waste reduction, and
\nenergy efficiency in your analysis. However, also focus on societal changes and challenges related to
\nsustainable practices, minorities, inclusion, and diversity. Explain how the client could balance increased
\ndemand with sustainable practices.
\nDiagrams
\nInclude at least one complex diagram or multiple smaller diagrams to aid readability. These should effectively
\nillustrate concepts or processes discussed in the text. Diagrams are not included in the word count but make
\nsure they are clear, relevant, and properly labelled.
\nPage 4 of 13
\nRemember, your case study report should not only display your understanding of the discipline-specific
\nknowledge (GLO1) but also your problem-solving skills (GLO5) and your awareness of global citizenship (GLO8).
\nTable 1 below summarises the structure and requirements for the Case Study Report. We provide this
\nstructure because the assignment is complex, and past students requested a structure that balances broad
\nguidance (i.e., high-level headings) with flexibility (e.g., content adaptable for specific chosen organisations).
\nThis is similar to industry\/consultancy practices that provide a \u201chouse-style\u201d for reports (e.g., ConsultantCo\u2019s).
\nThe Case Study Report will present an analysis of the client\u2019s deliver practices associated for a single
\nproduct\/service type (not a specific brand) of your choice that the client sells to its customers, and a related
\nnegative environmental impact (of your choice) that is relevant to and occurs in the client\u2019s deliver practices.
\nTable 1 specifies the Case Study Report requirements, including scope. This means, for instance, some types
\nof supply chain problems (e.g., source, make) cannot be explored. The scoping is necessary because in the
\npast, where students selected their own businesses, experience has shown that most students prefer scoped
\nrequirements. It means feedback and answers to one student on the assignment can help all students. It is
\nopen in other areas to balance students wanting structure versus wanting flexibility.
\nThe skills and knowledge that you (and the real client in the case of Option 2) gain from the doing the scoped
\nassignment are applicable in other areas. For example, the solution evaluation relating to a specific problem
\ntype within a specified supply chain process can be applied to other client practices.
\nYError! Reference source not found.ou have full flexibility to decide how much to write for each section \u2013 the
\ntable only offers suggestions. The only word limit requirement for the assignment is that the text in Part A
\ncannot exceed the total text word count by even one (1) word, including section headings. This is explained
\nfurther in the Word count calculation section below and summarised in the rubric (see the end of this
\ndocument).
\nTable 1: Part A \u2013 Case Study Report structure and requirements
\nRequirement Requirements for the Part A report sections
\nCover page (one
\npage only)
\n\u2022 Title (\u201cAssessment \u2013 Part A Case Study Report; Part B Feedback Reflection Report\u201d);
\n\u2022 Unit code and name;
\n\u2022 Student name and student ID;
\n\u2022 Text word count of Part A Case Study Report;
\n\u2022 The product\/service type chosen.
\n\u2022 Name of Company and Option number
\n\u2022 Client details for Option 2: owner\/manager name, address, contact number;
\nTable of contents \u2022 Add table of content
\n\u2022 Add list of figures\/tables if applicable
\n1. Introduction
\nHuman Written Academic Papers – Guide: 50 words
\n(can be exceeded)
\nIntroduce the Client (State the client\u2019s name, industry, size, and background of the
\nclient).
\nAddress the product\/service chosen, the chosen CSR negative environmental and
\nsocietal impact and the purpose of the report. Focus on how the COVID-19 pandemic
\nhas challenged previous practices.
\n2. Client
\nbackground
\nHuman Written Academic Papers – Guide: 250 words
\n(can be exceeded)
\n2.1 Goals\/strategies (you can reorder these sections if it flows more logically)
\nEvaluate the organisation\u2019s goals\/strategies relating specifically to the chosen
\nproduct\/service type, including CSR-related aspects of their goals\/strategies
\nchallenged by the COVID-19 pandemic. Address the targets and the current progress.
\n2.2 Products\/services
\nIntroduce and evaluate the selected product\/service type which it sells to customers,
\nincluding any CSR-related characteristics of the product\/service (if applicable).
\nOption 1 requires extrapolation\/inference from research into the client and\/or its
\nindustry. Option 2 for CSR aspects, since interviewees may be reluctant to discuss.
\nPage 5 of 13
\nRequirement Requirements for the Part A report sections
\n3. Deliver tasks
\nInsert diagram(s)
\nas a GIF\/JPEG.
\nNo text\/words
\nexplaining the
\ndiagram.
\nDiagram 1 (1a, 1b etc) showing all tasks of the deliver processes for the chosen
\nproduct\/service type, including potential negative environmental and societal impact
\ntasks, repeated tasks, and those identifying\/fixing problems in response to the COVID19 pandemic. For each task, provide company specific details on how it is done
\nmanually and\/or with what specific technology and the position title of who does the
\ntask. Carefully elaborate on the different technologies used and how the digital
\ntransformation of the supply chain has affected\/improved the deliver tasks. The
\ndiagram will include tasks interacting with all buyer behaviour segments for the
\nchosen product\/service type. Option 1 (and maybe Option 2) requires
\nextrapolation\/inference from research into the client and\/or its industry.
\n4. CSR problem
\nHuman Written Academic Papers – Guide: 850 words
\n(can be exceeded)
\nFor Option 2, this section does not require interviewing the client, especially if they
\nare reluctant to talk about CSR. This section for both Option 1 and 2 can be written
\nentirely based on your own research and evaluation.
\n\u2022 Explain one (1) specific negative environmental impact (e.g., land, air, water) and
\n(1) specific negative societal impact (e.g., inclusion, discrimination, worker safety
\nand well-being) that could be caused by one or more task(s) undertaken by the
\nclient\u2019s staff during deliver. Negative impacts caused by tasks performed by thirdparties involved in deliver (e.g., transport, customers) cannot be used.
\n\u2022 Make it clear which task(s) from Diagram 1 could cause the negative impact on the
\nenvironment and why.
\n\u2022 Explain why the negative environmental and societal impacts are specifically
\nrelevant to the client. This should include identifying and justifying the negative
\nimplications for the client if the identified deliver task(s) have a negative
\nenvironmental or societal impact.
\n5. AI solution
\nevaluation
\nHuman Written Academic Papers – Guide: 1,300
\nwords (can be
\nexceeded).
\nAdd subsection
\nheadings, which
\nare included in the
\ntext word count.
\nFor Option 2, Section 5 does not involve any interviewing in the client (only Sections
\n2-3). Section 5 should be written based only on your own research and evaluation.
\n5.1 AI solution
\nProvide an overview of an AI solution that addresses the following with respect to the
\nCSR problem in Section 4:
\n\u2022 Explains relevant data types that the client should collect (e.g., live camera-feed
\ndata of the client\u2019s staff doing deliver tasks, IoT data from sensors, recording of
\nsoftware use by client staff) and already collects (e.g., ERP system data, ERP event
\nlog data) about deliver task(s) and their potential negative environmental impact.
\n\u2022 Explains the AI solution (type, whether supervised or unsupervised learning) that
\ncould address one (1) aspect of negative environmental and one (1) aspect of
\nnegative societal impact by analysing the data:
\no Predict the cost incurred if the deliver task(s) has a negative impact OR
\no Identify the type of negative impact costs the deliver task(s) may cause OR
\no Predict the likelihood that a deliver task might cause a negative impact OR
\no Identify the types of causes of the negative impact by deliver task(s) OR
\no Alert in real-time if deliver task(s) might cause a negative impact.
\n\u2022 Explain how the AI solution addresses Covid-19 challenges.
\n\u2022Page Paper Describes the AI solution in terms of a realistic, incremental change for the client
\n(e.g., pilot project that will only address a specific aspect of the negative impact).
\nPage 6 of 13
\nRequirement Requirements for the Part A report sections
\n5. AI solution
\nevaluation
\n(continued)
\n5.2 AI solution viability evaluation
\nThe evaluation of the AI solution viability will include the following:
\n\u2022 Alignment (or non-alignment) with the client\u2019s strategic objectives\/goals.
\n\u2022 Alignment with Covid-19 situation.
\n\u2022 Potential problems for the client with collecting new data and with the new use of
\nexisting data, including possible staff\/customer resistance. Potential resolutions?
\n\u2022 Issues with new\/existing technology to implement the AI solution (e.g., client does
\n(not) have the expertise, off-the-shelf versus in-house versus outsourced options,
\nstaff resistance to use of the technology, etc). Potential resolutions?
\n\u2022 Client\u2019s capacity to afford the AI solution or how realistic the AI solution might be
\n(no cost-benefit or financial analysis is needed; focus on broad affordability).
\n\u2022 Is a non-AI solution more realistic for the client to address the CSR problem?
\nExtrapolation\/inference of these implications will be needed from research into the
\nclient and the client\u2019s industry (Option 1 and 2).
\n6. Conclusion
\nHuman Written Academic Papers – Guide: 50 words
\n(can be exceeded)
\nConclude with recommendations to the ConsultantCo senior consultant on whether
\nConsultantCo should work with the client, based on the Sections 4 and 5 evaluations,
\non the next stage of future detailed evaluation (e.g., cost-benefit analysis).
\n– – Note: for Option 2 please remove all recommendations from the version of the report
\ngiven to the real business to avoid repercussions, if the business follows your
\nrecommendation and experiences problems\/losses. This is despite the confirmation
\nform stating they must get separate advice before taking action.
\n7. Client sources
\nNot in the text
\nword count.
\nList all sources from the client cited in the report. For Option 2, this will include at least
\none (1) personal communication reference (e.g., interview with the owner). For
\nOptions 1 and 2, it can include the client\u2019s website (if applicable), other sources (e.g.,
\nclient strategy\/annual reports) to support client-specific evaluation in Sections 2-5. See
\nhttp:\/\/www.deakin.edu.au\/students\/study-support\/referencing for formatting
\ninstructions. Use the \u201cpersonal communication\u201d style for interviews (Option 2 only).
\n8. Industry sources
\nNot in the text
\nword count.
\nHigh quality (e.g., academic journal articles, industry reports, reports on handling the
\nsourcing of product types, environmental impact reports) and relevant research
\nsources about the client\u2019s industry cited in the report (including in diagrams) to
\nsupport Sections 2-5 (especially Option 1). See formatting instructions at:
\nhttp:\/\/www.deakin.edu.au\/students\/study-support\/referencing.
\n– – Note: for students wanting to use Endnote to create citations and references,
\nSections 7 and 8 can be combined into a single section if preferred. For students
\nusing Option 1 where the difference between client and industry sources is not as
\nclear, combine Sections 7 and 8 if preferred.
\nNo appendices Appendices are not permitted in this assignment and will be ignored if included.
\nThe aim of the Case Study Report is to present an evaluation of the implications or viability of the client
\nintroducing the AI solution. The report will focus on potential negative implications of the AI solution so that
\nConsultantCo can determine early in the consultancy lifecycle whether to \u201cqualify out\u201d before developing a
\nfull-scale proposal for client. This approach is typically used, for example, by ERP consultants in industry who
\ncompete for a client\u2019s business and develop ERP proposals for free for client consideration. A report that only
\npresents benefits of the AI solution for the client will therefore not achieve ConsultantCo\u2019s goal of determine
\nwhether it is worth devoting resources on a full-scale proposal.
\nYou will write the report about the client for the senior consultant of ConsultantCo. For Option 2, if the
\nowner\/manager of the client is interested in your report ideas, they can get independent advice to make a
\nPage 7 of 13
\ndecision themselves and should not decide using the information in your report. This is to protect you and the
\nclient. Please provide the owner\/manager with a copy of the report as a \u201cthank you\u201d for their time and help.
\nYou can tailor the report for the owner\/manager as needed (e.g., removing parts only relevant for
\nassessment). For Option 2, do not criticise the owner, company, etc in the version of the report you give them!
\nOwners of small companies in particular often feel their company is part of their identity, so criticising the
\ncompany is criticising them personally. Instead, write in a positive manner such as \u201cAn opportunity to
\nenhance\u2026\u201d, especially for problems in the company which the owner has not told you about.
\nPart A \u2013 Text word count penalty and calculation
\nThe \u201cPart A text word count penalty\u201d rubric criterion states that the text word count of the Part A Case Study
\nReport must be less than or equal to the text word limit (not a single word more), as stated in the Assessment
\nRequirementssection. The 10% leeway on the word count in some units DOES NOT apply in this unit. Following
\nthe rubric, a penalty mark will be deducted from your final mark.
\nThis strict requirement by ConsultantCo reflects industry requirements that, when you are asked to write a
\nproblem solving (or evaluation) report of \u2018X\u2019 words or \u2018X\u2019 pages, exceeding this requirement is typically not
\nacceptable. An important GLO5 problem analysis skill, therefore, is convincing managers (and in this
\nassignment, the senior consultants) your evaluation is thorough and complete within such restrictions.
\nFurther, a strict word limit ensures that you do not do more work than is required for the assessment.
\nThe word count is determined by selecting everything from the Part A Introduction section heading through
\nto the end of the Conclusion section in Table 1 above (e.g., excluding only the cover page and reference lists),
\nand using MS Word\u2019s word count feature (unchecking the \u201cfootnote\u201d and \u201cendnote\u201d option). The text word
\nlimit includes everything (e.g., headings, text in tables, citations). Nothing can be scanned, and no images can
\nbe used, to reduce the word count, except Diagrams 1 in the requirements table. – – Note that the rubric specifies
\na word count penalty if anything other than Diagram 1 is scanned or is an image in Part A.
\nDiagram 1 (i.e. 1a, 1b, etc) can be image files (e.g. GIF, JPEG) so they are not included in the text word count.
\nSoftware used to create diagrams (e.g. Powerpoint) typically have options to save each diagram (e.g.
\nPowerpoint slide) as an image, then the image file can be copied into the report. Diagrams 1a, 1b, etc must
\nhave captions (e.g. \u201cFigure 1a: title of the diagram\u201d), which can be inside the image file so that it does not
\nincrease the word count.
\nYou can use a numbered citation approach so that citations do not contribute to the text word limit (see
\nexample), because there are no spaces between citation numbers and punctuation\/words. The reference list
\nis still formatted using the Write My Essay For Me | Essay Writing Service For Your Papers – Harvard referencing style. This example is not relevant to assignment, but it shows
\nhow to use numbered citations, and synthesise (or combine evidence from) multiple sources.
\nIt is unclear from existing research whether differences in revenue of small and medium enterprises (SMEs)
\nhas an impact on their ability to adopt information systems (IS) tools. This is because most studies1,2,4,5 did
\nnot state any maximum revenue to be an SME, or differentiate SME sizes on the basis of revenue. Only two
\nstudies, by contrast, stated that companies must have less than 50 million Euros in revenue3(p268) or Canadian
\ndollars in sales6(p1007) to be considered an SME, but neither article differentiates SMEs on the basis of revenue
\nor sales. The fact that most studies did not state the maximum revenue to be an SME, or differentiate SMEs
\nbased on revenue, may be due to limitations of the definition of SMEs used or cited in the studies. It was
\ntherefore not possible to identify the extent to which revenue affects if\/how SMEs adopt IS tools, or what
\nrevenue related support different types of SMEs may need.
\n<<< REST OF THE REPORT OMITTED >>>
\nResearch sources
\n1. Lee, S, Park, SB & Lim, GG 2013, ‘Using balanced scorecards for the evaluation of \u201cSoftware-as-aservice\u201d’, Information & Management, vol. 50, no. 7, pp. 553-561.
\n2. Zhang, M, Sarker, S & Sarker, S 2013, ‘Drivers and export performance impacts of IT capability in \u2018bornglobal\u2019 firms: a cross-national study’, Information Systems Journal, vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 419-443.
\nPage 8 of 13
\n3. Alonso-Mendo, F, Fitzgerald, G & Frias-Martinez, E. 2009, ‘Understanding web site redesigns in smalland medium-sized enterprises (SMEs): a U.K.-based study on the applicability of e-commerce Stage
\nModels’, European Page Essay – Journal of Information Systems, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 264-279.
\n4. Bidan, M, Rowe, F & Truex, D 2012, ‘An empirical study of IS architectures in French SMEs: integration
\napproaches’, European Page Essay – Journal of Information Systems, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 287-302.
\n5. Levenburg, NM 2005, ‘Does size matter? Small firms’ use of e-business tools in the supply chain’,
\nElectronic Markets, vol. 15, no. 2, pp. 94-105.
\n6. Bergeron, F, Raymond, L & Rivard, S 2004, ‘Ideal patterns of strategic alignment and business
\nperformance’, Information & Management, vol. 41, no. 8, pp. 1003-1020.
\n<<< REST OF THE REFERENCES ARE OMITTED>>>
\nPart A \u2013 No copying of any content, including client sources.
\nAll aspects of the Part A Case Study Report should be written in your own words (e.g.,sections, tables, Diagram
\n1, etc). This means that no content of any kind from any source can be copied into the report, including no
\ncopying from client sources (e.g., websites, reports, etc), no copying of diagrams and no quoting. The report
\nasks for your evaluation of client background, tasks in Diagram 1, CSR problem, and new AI solution and its
\nimplications. This means that everything you write and draw for Part A must be entirely your own work,
\nbecause the evaluation must be your work only. Copying from any sources therefore will not meet
\nConsultantCo requirements.
\nPart B \u2013 Feedback Reflection Report
\nBusiness professionals (e.g., Business Analysts, Consultants) must obtain feedback from clients to verify that
\nthe professional\u2019s work addresses client needs (meets their requirements) and will not be rejected (or \u2018failed\u2019)
\nby the client (e.g. refuses to pay the professional). Professionals cannot say it was the client\u2019s fault if a report
\nis rejected by the client. Instead, this indicates the failure of a business professional to engage in quality
\nproblem solving. In this unit, you will be treated as professionals. You must take active steps to ensure that
\nyou understand the Case Study Report requirements so that it is not rejected\/failed by ConsultantCo or the
\nsenior consultants. In the case of Option 2, following the interviewee\u2019s advice about how to write the report
\nmay not satisfy ConsultantCo\u2019s requirements.
\nYou are expected to seek actively, interpret accurately and respond effectively to feedback\/clarifications on
\nyour understanding of the Part A requirements above before submission. You are required to write a 500 word
\nFeedback Reflection Report summarising how you sought, interpreted and utilised the feedback, including
\nproviding evidence that your interpretation of feedback is accurate. That is, how do you know you interpreted
\nthe feedback correctly? What actions did you take to check your interpretation? For Part B, you only critique
\nthe effectiveness of your active seeking and accurate interpreting\/implementing of feedback. Do not
\ncomment on feedback quality from consultants, nor why you could not attend seminars. (The former can be
\ndone by contacting the Unit Chair directly and\/or by completing unit evaluation surveys.)
\nThe weekly seminars are your main opportunity to get feedback on your understanding of the assignment
\nrequirements. There is a Burwood seminar requiring face-to-face attendance, and a Cloud Seminar requiring
\nreal-time online attendance. The latter will be recorded for those who cannot attend.
\nThe seminars involve interactive activities which will help you determine how well you understand the Part A
\nand Part B requirements. Staff facilitators will give feedback on your attempts of the activities. You will then
\napply that feedback and understanding when working on Part A sections and the Part B reflection.
\nAll students can ask assignment related questions during the seminars, and via the CloudDeakin discussion
\nfolders, which also constitutes feedback. Questions can relate to interpreting the assignment requirements
\nand assessment rubric. The CloudDeakin folders can also be used to ask follow-up questions arising when you
\nstart to apply the seminar feedback when drafting the Part A sections.
\nPage 9 of 13
\nPlease see the Week 1 seminar slides for a weekly timetable of which Part A sections will be the focus each
\nweek. These slides can be found via the Content tab in CloudDeakin, then the Learning resources option, then
\nsee the bottom of the Week 1 topic resources).
\nThere are various points to note about the seminars and the Part B Reflection Report:
\n\u2022 The Introduction (Section 1), Conclusion (Section 6) and source\/references sections do not require
\nfeedback because these are short and simple sections compared to Sections 2 to 5. For this reason, there
\nare no seminars covering these sections of Part A, but you are welcome to ask questions in CloudDeakin.
\n\u2022 Any aspect of selecting the client, product\/service type, CSR problem etc (covered in Section 2) is outside
\nthe scope of Part B.
\n\u2022 The previous two points mean that the only seminars and Part A sections that are within the scope of
\nthe Part B Reflect Report will be the Weeks 3 to 6 seminars about Sections 3 to 5.
\n\u2022 Part B should reflect on a minimum of two seminars out of the 4 within the scope of Part B, which means
\nthat students can miss two seminars without affecting Part B.
\nA template for the Part B Feedback Reflection Report is shown below, where the parts in bold between the
\nsquare brackets are examples of what types of things to reflect upon for a seminar:
\nExamples of accurate interpretation of feedback:
\nSeminar X: [specific example of feedback that indicated you did not understand the assignment
\nrequirements for a section, evidence that you interpreted feedback accurately, actions taken to check
\nthe accuracy of feedback interpretation, how the feedback was used to write the section, etc].
\nSeminar Y: [as per above].
\nWith regards to checking the accuracy of your interpretation of the seminar feedback, you can post questions
\n(not post section drafts) to CloudDeakin discussion folders to query your interpretation. What evidence
\nindicates that you interpreted the responses in CloudDeakin accurately?
\nLearning Outcomes
\nThis task allows you to demonstrate achievement towards the unit learning outcomes. The ULOs are aligned
\nwith specific graduate learning outcomes \u2013 that is, the skills and knowledge graduates are expected to have
\nupon completion of their studies \u2013 and this assessment task is an important tool in determining achievement
\nof those outcomes.
\nIf you do not demonstrate achievement of the unit learning outcomes, you will not be successful in this unit.
\nIt is good practice to familiarise yourself with the ULOs and GLOs as they provide guidance on the knowledge,
\nunderstanding and skills you\u2019re expected to demonstrate upon completion of the unit. In this way they can be
\nused to guide your study.
\nUnit Learning Outcomes (ULO) Graduate Learning Outcomes (GLO)
\nULO 1: Identify, evaluate and justify the SCM issues of
\norganisations (including existing use of digital
\ntransformations) against their strategic objectives.
\nGLO1 Discipline-specific knowledge
\nGLO5: Problem solving
\nPage 10 of 13
\nUnit Learning Outcomes (ULO) Graduate Learning Outcomes (GLO)
\nULO 2: Evaluate SCM solutions (including associated digital
\ntransformation where applicable) and justify those which
\ncan resolve an organisation\u2019s SCM issues and support its
\nstrategic objectives.
\nGLO1 Discipline-specific knowledge
\nGLO5: Problem solving
\nULO 3: Critically evaluate and justify SCM issues and
\nsolutions of an organisation taking into account their global,
\nnational and local economic, social and environmental
\nresponsibilities.
\nGLO1 Discipline-specific knowledge
\nGLO8: Global citizenship
\nULO 4: Seek, interpret and act upon feedback to improve
\nproposed SCM solutions.
\nGLO1 Discipline-specific knowledge
\nGLO5: Problem solving
\nSubmission
\nYou are to submit your assignment in the individual Assignment Dropbox in the MIS713 CloudDeakin unit site
\non or before the due date. The assignment submission will include Part A and B in the one file.
\nWhen uploading your assignment, name your document using the following syntax: \n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

MIS713 \u2013 Digital Transformation of Supply Chains – Trimester 2 2023 Assessment Task 1 \u2013 Part A – Case Study Report and Complex Diagrams; Part\u2026<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[5394,5233,43,5232,4206,5239,5240,5236,5396,5238,5235,5395,5234,5244,5068,5237],"tags":[387,1887,4000,3998,4868,2035,3992,5401,4285,5400],"class_list":["post-12800","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-custom-essay-help","category-dissertation-ideas","category-dissertation-topics","category-essay-topics","category-free-essays","category-help-in-assignment","category-help-with-class","category-i-need-help","category-i-need-help-writing-an-essay","category-page-paper","category-research-paper-samples","category-term-paper-writers","category-thesis-examples","category-thesis-writers","category-write","category-write-a-paper","tag-buy-essay","tag-cheap-essay-writers","tag-get-assignments-done","tag-i-need-help-writing-my-homework","tag-page-paper","tag-phd-essay-writers","tag-research-paper-writing-service-for-any-topic","tag-study-essay","tag-write-my-assignment-ireland","tag-write-my-research-paper"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12800","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=12800"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/12800\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=12800"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=12800"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.colapapers.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=12800"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}