CIS7026 – Business Process and Data Analysis – 20 Credits
Term 1
Module Leader: XXXXXX XXXXXXX
Assessment Brief
Assessment Title: Business Analysis Final Assignment
WRIT1 MAIN 100%
HAND-OUT DATE: 27th September 2021
HAND-IN DATE: 17th December 2021
Contents
Assessment Requirements / Tasks (include all guidance notes) 3
Referencing Requirements (Harvard) 9
Learning Outcomes
This assessment is designed to demonstrate a student’s completion of the following Learning Outcomes:
- Critically evaluate, and reflexively apply, methods, techniques and tools for assessing, controlling and improving organisational processes (number 1 in the module descriptor)
- Critically demonstrate an appreciation of issues relating to the analysis of business processes in organisations (number 2 in the module descriptor)
- Create appropriate visual representations of their analysis via use of an appropriate tool (number 3 in the module descriptor)
EDGE
The Cardiff Met EDGE supports students in graduating with the knowledge, skills, and attributes that allow them to contribute positively and effectively to the communities in which they live and work.
This module assessment provides opportunities for students to demonstrate development of the following EDGE Competencies:
| ETHICAL | NA |
| DIGITAL | The knowledge and skills required for the role of Business Analyst to evaluate and demonstrate data-driven business analysis with creative recommendations on improving business financial standing based on technology. |
| GLOBAL | Exposure to Industrial role of business analyst by analysing publicly traded business. |
| ENTREPRENEURIAL | The expertise to evaluate an industry sector/business for entrepreneurship and propose viable solutions for business planning and operations. |
Assessment Requirements / Tasks (include all guidance notes)
This assessment consists of following two parts:
- Part 1: Business process analysis (75% weightage – 3000 Words)
- Part 2: Business data analysis (25% weightage – 1000 Words)
The rest of the section provides the detailed description of the tasks required for each part of the assessment.
Part 1: Business process analysis (75% weight for the Final grade – 3000 Words)
You are working as a business analyst in a UK based consultancy firm. You are assigned a task to provide 3000 words report of business analysis for a publicly traded UK/US/European business that is highly affected by Brexit and COVID-19. The report is required to be of appropriate format, the standard of presentation and content. The purpose of the report is twofold: to discover, analyse and comment on the inadequacies of the company business processes; and, in doing so, to justify and evaluate an appropriate selection of Business Analysis techniques and tools.
This assignment is potentially very broad in scope: it is up to you to determine the business, exact scope of investigation and justify this. You need to cite the sources you refer to in finding out more about this process. You will need to select, apply and evaluate techniques and tools which provide for all five activities (strategy analysis, investigate situation, consider perspectives, analyse needs and define requirements) and, by necessity, encompass at least two of the three paradigms (socio-technical, functional and object-oriented). The following table is a reminder of those which we have, or will, cover in class. Other techniques and tools may be appropriate; confirm these with the Module Leader on or before the 11th week of the module.
| Strategy Analysis | Investigate Situation | Consider Perspectives | Analyse Needs | Define Requirements | |
| Socio- Technical | External environment analysis Internal environment analysis | Rich picture | CATWOE Type of Participation Thomas- Kilmann Power-Interest | X | X |
| Functional | DFD Context Diagram | X | Structured techniques | DFD, ERM and ELH | |
| Object – Oriented | Context diagram | X | Use Cases | Class and Sequence diagrams |
| Theme | Required Tools |
| Strategy analysis | (PESTEL Analysis OR Michael Porter’s Five Forces Model) AND Resource Audit |
| Investigate situation | Rich Picture AND (UML Context Diagram OR DFD Context Diagram) |
| Consider perspective | CATWOE AND Power/interest grid Note: CATWOE analysis for each stakeholder |
| Analyse needs | (Structured English OR Decision Table OR Decision Tree) AND UML Use Case diagrams and Use Case descriptions |
| Define requirements | (Level 0 and Level 1 DFD Diagrams and descriptions) AND UML Class and Sequence Diagrams |
Task 1 (300 words): An introduction that includes a definition and justification of selection of a publicly traded business, scope, a brief description of the context and nature of the problem and the current level of operational performance as depicted in external sources, where appropriate citing sources according to the Harvard system. The selection of the business must be based on evidence such as cashflow statement, balance sheet and net income profit. (Hint: For publicly traded businesses cash flow statement, balance sheet and net income profit statements are available on Yahoo Finance or their websites under the investor relation section)
Task 2 (300 words): A justification of your chosen package of techniques and tools (pre-application), by reference to your own criteria, where appropriate citing sources according to the Harvard system.
Task 3 (1500 words): An application to the scenario of your chosen package of techniques and tools for all five activities (strategy analysis, investigate situation, consider perspectives, analyse needs and define requirements), produced using a CASE tool if appropriate, together with assumptions and appropriate description/documentation*
Task 4 (400 words): Comments and observations on the inadequacies of the current system, including recommendations to the QAA, where appropriate citing elements of your application (#5) together with sources according to the Harvard system.
Task 5 (500 words): An evaluation of the ‘fit’ of your chosen package of techniques and tools to this specific context (post-application), by reference to your own criteria (#4), where appropriate citing sources according to the Harvard system.
*Refer to lecture notes for guidance on how these should be done. As an example, if you use DFDs to define requirements you should include here for that part of the fifth activity:
- Level 0 DFD, produced using a CASE tool, and assumptions
- Level 1 DFD, produced using a CASE tool, and further assumptions
- External Entity Descriptions
- Elementary Process Descriptions for each process at its lowest decomposed level
- Input/Output Descriptions for data flows that cross the system boundary
Part 2: Business data analysis (25% weight for the Final grade – 1000 words)
The aim of this assignment is to provide students with the opportunity to gain experience and to develop skills in obtaining business dataset (using associative learning techniques). Students need to explain market basket analysis, association rules, importance of different parameters (e.g., support, confidence, lift etc.), check the outcome of Apriori algorithm with changing the parameters (e.g. support, Confidence, lift etc.) and explain the outcomes (e.g. some suggestions from association rule).
Students could choose a dataset from the pool of datasets given by the module leader and analyse the data and present insights into the business using Spyder(Python) (1000 words equivalent).
Task 1: Introduction
Task 2: Application (Business insights, Comments, observations and recommendations)
Task 3: Conclusion
*Refer to lecture notes for guidance on how these should be done. As an example, you can see the lecture/video in the folder ‘Market Basket Analysis’ in Moodle).
Assessment Criteria
| Part 1: Business process analysis | 75% weight |
| Task 1: Introduction | 10% |
| Task 2: Justification | 10% |
| Task 3: Application | 30% |
| Task 4: Comments, observations and recommendations | 15% |
| Task 5: Evaluation | 10% |
| Part 2: Business data analysis | 25% weight |
| Task 1: Introduction | 6% |
| Task 2: Analysis | 12% |
| Task 3: Conclusion | 7% |
Submission Details
Please see Moodle for confirmation of the Assessment submission date.
Submission will be by 4:00pm on the deadline day.
Any assessments submitted after the deadline will not be marked and will be recorded as a Non-Attempt.
The assessment must be submitted as a zip file / pdf / word document through the Turnitin submission point in Moodle
Your assessment should be titled with your Student ID Number, module code and assessment id, e.g. st12345678 CIS7026 WRIT1
Feedback
Feedback for the assessment will be provided electronically via Moodle, and will normally be available 4 working weeks after initial submission. The feedback return date will be confirmed on Moodle.
Feedback will be provided in the form of a rubric and supported with comments on your strengths and the areas which you improve.
All marks are preliminary and are subject to quality assurance processes and confirmation at the Examination Board.
Further information on the Academic and Feedback Policy in available in the Academic Handbook (Vol 1, Section 4.0)
Marking Criteria
| 70 – 100% (Distinction) | A very comprehensive technically correct submission. All major aspects of the assignment covered. Clear expression of ideas. A very high standard of presentation. All problems identified and solutions are feasible and within the restrictions of the assignment. All sources acknowledged and referenced to a high standard. |
| 60-69% (Merit) | Most major aspects of the assignment covered with supporting explanation and discussion of their roles. Some minor technical errors and misconceptions. Good identification of problems and good solutions. Good presentation and standard of referencing. |
| 50-59% (Pass) | Demonstrates mastery of a complex and specialised area of knowledge, but is frequently descriptive and based on given sources. There is limited evidence of independent thinking. |
| 40-49% (Narrow Fail) | Demonstrates limited knowledge and understanding of the field of study relevant to the task. Factual inaccuracies, errors and misconceptions are evident in important areas and elements of the assessed work may be irrelevant to the task. |
| 0-39% (Fail) | The level of attainment that falls well below the standard required to pass a Masters degree. The work presented for assessment may be very poor, incomplete and/or irrelevant and will demonstrates a serious lack of comprehension and/or engagement with the set task. Students awarded marks within this band may have misunderstood or misinterpreted the set task. No learning outcomes are met in full although there maybe minimal attainment in relation to one or two. |
Additional Information
Referencing Requirements (Harvard)
The Harvard (or author-date) format should be used for all references (including images).
Further information on Referencing can be found at Cardiff Met’s Academic Skills website.
Mitigating Circumstances
If you have experienced changes or events which have adversely affected your academic performance on the assessment, you may be eligible for Mitigating Circumstances (MCs). You should contact your Module Leader, Personal Tutor or Year Tutor in the first instance.
An application for MCs, along with appropriate supporting evidence, can be submitted via the following link to the MCs Dashboard
Applications for MCs should ideally be submitted as soon as possible after circumstances occur & at the time of the assessment. Applications must be submitted before the relevant Examination Board.
Further information on the Mitigating Circumstances procedure is available in the Academic Handbook (Volume 1, Section 5)
Unfair Practice
Cardiff Metropolitan University takes issues of unfair practice extremely seriously. The University has distinct procedures and penalties for dealing with unfair practice in examination or non-examination conditions. These are explained in full in the University’s Unfair Practice Procedure (Academic Handbook: Vol 1, Section 8)
Types of Unfair Practice, include:
Plagiarism, which can be defined as using without acknowledgement another person’s words or ideas and submitting them for assessment as though it were one’s own work, for instance by copying, translating from one language to another or unacknowledged paraphrasing. Further examples include:
- Use of any quotation(s) from the published or unpublished work of other persons, whether published in textbooks, articles, the Web, or in any other format, which quotations have not been clearly identified as such by being placed in quotation marks and acknowledged.
- Use of another person’s words or ideas that have been slightly changed or paraphrased to make it look different from the original.
- Summarising another person’s ideas, judgments, diagrams, figures, or computer programmes without reference to that person in the text and the source in a bibliography or reference list.
- Use of services of essay banks and/or any other agencies.
- Use of unacknowledged material downloaded from the Internet.
- Re-use of one’s own material except as authorised by the department.
Collusion, which can be defined as when work that that has been undertaken with others is submitted and passed off as solely the work of one person. An example of this would be where several students work together on an assessment and individually submit work which contains sections which are the same. Assessments briefs will clearly identify where joint preparation and joint submission is specifically permitted, in all other cases it is not.
Fabrication of data, making false claims to have carried out experiments, observations, interviews or other forms of data collection and analysis, or acting dishonestly in any other way.
Get expert help for CIS7026 – Business Process and Data Analysis and many more. 24X7 help, plag free solution. Order online now!
