SCM5001 Operations and Supply Chain Management Assignment help

Assignment Brief
As part of the formal assessment for the programme you are required to submit a Report
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:
1. Evaluate the relevance of module concepts to specific organisational contexts.
2. Analyse the design of delivery systems and processes using appropriate models
and frameworks.
3. Examine the performance of delivery systems and processes using appropriate
models and frameworks.
4. Design appropriate strategies to enhance delivery, performance, and design.
5. Employ project management techniques to manage novel activity to realise benefits
from process change in a complex environment.
Graduate Attribute:
Professionally knowledgeable in their subject area, with in‐depth comprehension,
awareness, independent research skills, and other skills associated with their subject area
and discipline(s). Evaluate understanding of subject area with the ability to identify key
questions, research and pursue evidence-based arguments within the discipline using
various academic and professional body resources.
All learning outcomes must be met to pass the module.


Guidance
Your assignment should include: a title page containing your student number, the module
name, the submission deadline and the exact word count of your submitted document; the
appendices if relevant; and a reference list in AU Harvard system(s). 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.
You must not include your name in your submission because Arden University operates
anonymous marking, which means that markers should not be aware of the identity of the
student. However, please do not forget to include your STU number.
Maximum word count: 3000 words
Please refer to the full word count policy which can be found in the Student Policies
section here: Arden University | Regulatory Framework
The word count includes everything in the main body of the assessment (including in text
citations and references). The word count excludes numerical data in tables, figures,
diagrams, footnotes, reference list and appendices. All other printed words ARE
included in the word count.

Assignment Task
You are required to write a case study report, not exceeding 3,000 words, focusing on the
impact of operations and supply chain management in an organisation’s quest for
operational excellence. You may select an appropriate case from your professional
environment, or if this isn't possible, one will be provided for you. Your report should include:
1. An evaluation of two key drivers of operational excellence.
2. An analysis and evaluation of effective delivery systems, using suitable models and
frameworks.
3. Recommendations aimed at enhancing supply chain operational excellence
This assessment will test your analytical abilities, your capability to apply theoretical
concepts in a practical context and your capacity to suggest practical improvements within
an organisational setting. You will find details of task components and mark allocation which
will be used for final mark below.
Total (3000 Words)


Template: V5
Task components and mark allocation which will be used for final mark:
1. Evaluation of two key drivers of Operational Excellence (30 marks)
Learning Outcome Covered: LO1, LO2
Marking Guidance:
- Introduction (10 marks): Provide a well-structured introduction that clearly
identifies the impact of effective operational excellence supported with evidence from
the literature. The introduction should also present a compelling argument on the
significance of operational excellence in real-world supply chain management.
Additionally, students should clearly identify the case study they have selected for
analysis within this context.

- Depth of understanding (10 marks): Assess your understanding of operational
excellence concepts. Your explanation should demonstrate a clear grasp of how
these concepts are relevant and applicable to specific organisational settings.
- Contextual relevance (10 marks): Evaluate how effectively you connect these
concepts to your chosen case study (including specific examples or scenarios from
the organisation). Evaluate how well you have used literature to support or challenge
the organisation's practices.

2. An analysis and evaluation of effective delivery systems, using suitable models and
frameworks. (30 marks)
Learning Outcomes Covered: LO2, LO3
Marking Guidance:
- Analytical depth (10 marks): You are expected to critically analyse the design and
performance of your chosen organisation's delivery systems. Utilise appropriate
models and frameworks to support your analysis. You should carefully examine how
these systems are structured and how effectively they operate, identifying both
strengths and areas for improvement. Make sure to apply theoretical knowledge to
real-world scenarios in your case study, providing a detailed and well-supported
examination of how these systems contribute to operational excellence.
- Application of models/frameworks (10 marks): You need to demonstrate the
accurate and relevant application of theoretical models and frameworks to your
selected case study. Ensure that the models and frameworks you choose are
appropriate for analysing the design and performance of the organisation’s delivery
systems and processes. Your application should clearly show how these theoretical
tools help in understanding the operational dynamics and decision-making within the
organisation.
- Insightfulness of evaluation (10 marks): Your evaluation should provide insightful
observations about the organisation's operational efficiencies and inefficiencies.
Discuss potential areas for improvement, identifying specific aspects of the
organisation's processes or systems that could be enhanced to optimise
performance. Your analysis should be deep and reflective, aiming to highlight critical
details that contribute to or detract from the organisation's operational success.

3. Recommendations aimed at enhancing supply chain operational excellence (20 marks)
Learning Outcomes Covered: LO4, LO5
Marking Guidance:
- Strategic relevance (10 marks): Evaluate the relevance and practicality of the
strategies you propose to enhance delivery and performance within the organisation.
Your recommendations should be innovative showcasing your ability to think
creatively and solve problems effectively. Focus on how these strategies can be
realistically implemented to improve existing processes and overall operational
efficiency. Ensure that your suggestions are not only original but also tailored to the
specific needs and constraints of the organisation.
- Integration of project management techniques (10 marks): Assess how
effectively you utilise project management techniques to manage and implement
process changes within the chosen organisation. Your evaluation should detail the
practical steps and strategies you propose, demonstrating how they align with the
complexity and specific challenges of the organisation. Highlight your ability to apply
these project management principles in a way that is both actionable and suited to
the organisational context.
General Assessment Criteria (20 marks applicable across all components):
- Professionalism and presentation (3 marks): The case report should be
professionally presented, well-organised and adherent to academic standards of
writing.
- Research depth and integration (3 marks): Evaluate the extent and depth of
research undertaken. The student should demonstrate the ability to seek out and
integrate information from a variety of academic and professional resources.
- Critical reflection (4 marks): Critically reflect on what you have learned and how
you have applied these insights to the case study. Your reflections should
demonstrate a deep understanding of the discipline and an acute awareness of how
theoretical concepts translate into practical applications. Highlight how these
learnings have shaped your thinking and approach to operational excellence within
the organisational context.
- Clarity and precision (5 marks): Ensure that your writing is clear and your
arguments are precisely articulated. Your explanations should follow a logical
structure, making it easy for readers to understand and follow your line of reasoning.
Focus on presenting your points coherently, ensuring each argument is wellsupported and effectively communicated.
- References (5 marks): Ensure that you adhere to the correct AU Harvard
referencing style throughout your assignment, both within the text and in the
references section. This involves consistently applying the specified citation format
to all sources you reference, helping to maintain academic integrity and allowing
readers to verify your research.

Formative Feedback
You have the opportunity to submit a 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.
If you are a distance learning student, you should submit your work, by email, to your tutor,
no later than 2 weeks before the actual submission deadline. If you are a blended learning
student, your tutor will give you a deadline for formative feedback and further details.
Formative feedback will not be given to work submitted after the above date or the date
specified by your tutor - if a blended learning student.
Referencing Guidance
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 AU Harvard
referencing system(s).
Follow this link to find the referencing guides for your subject: Arden Library
Submission Guidance
Assignments submitted late will not be accepted and will be marked as a 0% fail.
Your assessment can be submitted as a single Word (MS Word) or PDF file where your
notes and narration are clearly accessible for marking.
If you chose to submit multiple files, you must name each document as the question/part
you are answering along with your student number ie Q1 Section A STUXXXX. If you wish
to overwrite your submission or one of your submissions, you must ensure that your
new submission is named exactly the same as the previous in order for the system
to overwrite it.

Assessment Criteria (Learning objectives covered - all)
Level 5 reflects the continuing development in knowledge, understanding and skills from Level 4. At Level 5, students are not expected to be fully autonomous
but are able to take responsibility for their own learning with appropriate guidance and direction. Students are expected to further develop their theoretical
knowledge within a more intellectual context and to demonstrate this through more complex forms of expression which move beyond the descriptive or
imitative domain. Students are expected to demonstrate skills of analysis in both problem-solving and resolution.
Grade Mark
Bands
Generic Assessment Criteria
First
(1)
80%+ An outstanding information base exploring and analysing the discipline, its theory and any associated ethical considerations. There is
sophisticated use and management of learning resources, and a high degree of autonomy is demonstrated. Writing is outstandingly well
structured and accurately referenced throughout. Where appropriate, outstanding professional skills are demonstrated. The work is original and with some additional effort could considered for internal publication.
70-79% An excellent knowledge base within which the discipline is explored and analysed. There is a degree of originality in the approach. The work demonstrates confidence and autonomy and extends to consider ethical issues. Learning resources have been managed confidently. Writing is exceptionally well structured and accurately referenced throughout. Where appropriate, an excellent level of
professional skills is demonstrated, and the work demonstrates a high level of intellectual and academic skills.
Upper
second
(2:1)
60-69% A very good knowledge base which explores and analyses the discipline, its theory, and any associated ethical issues. There is evidence of some originality and independence of thought. A very good range of learning resources underpin the work and there is evidence of
growing confidence and self-direction. The work demonstrates the ability to analyse the subject and apply theory with good academic and intellectual skills. Academic writing skills are very good, expression is accurate overall, and the work is consistently referenced
throughout.
Lower
second
(2:2)
50-59% A good understanding of the discipline which begins to analyse the subject and apply some underpinning theory. There may be
reference to some of the ethical considerations. The work shows a sound level of competence in managing basic sources and materials.
Academic writing skills are good and accurate overall, and the work is planned and structured with some though. Professional skills are
good (where appropriate). The work lacks original thought, but academic and intellectual skills are moving into the critical domain. The
work is referenced throughout.
Third
(3)
40-49% Satisfactory level of performance in which there are some omissions in understanding the subject, its underpinning theory, and ethical
considerations. There is little evidence of independent thought, and the work shows a basic use of sources and materials. Academic and
intellectual skills are limited. The work may lack structure overall. There are some difficulties in developing professional skills (where
appropriate). There is an attempt to reference the work.

stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or means, including without limitation electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior written consent of Arden University. To find out more about the use and distribution of
programme materials please see the Arden Student Terms and Conditions.
Template: V5
Marginal
Fail
30-39% A limited piece of work in which there are clear gaps in understanding the subject, its underpinning theory, and ethical considerations.
The work shows a limited use of sources and materials. Academic and professional skills are weak and there are errors in expression and
the work may lack structure overall. There are difficulties in developing professional skills (where appropriate). The work lacks original
thought and is largely imitative.
Clear
fail
29% and
Below
A poor performance in which there are substantial gaps in knowledge and understanding, underpinning theory and ethical
considerations. The work shows little evidence in the use of appropriate sources and materials. Academic writing skills are very weak and
there are numerous errors in expression. The work lacks structure overall. Professional skills (where appropriate) are not developed. The
work is imitative.