| ASSESSMENT 2 BRIEF | |
| Subject Code and Title | MIS500 Foundations of Information Systems |
| Assessment | Group Case Study |
| Individual/Group | Group |
| Length | Part A – Group report 3000 words +/- 10% Part B – Group presentation 10-15 minutes |
| Learning Outcomes | The Subject Learning Outcomes demonstrated by successful completion of the task below include: Apply business and IS knowledge and concepts to develop verifiable solutions and recommendations to address and support strategic goals of a business or an organisation. Develop and communicate a collaborative strategy which embodies the principles of agile methodology to stakeholders of an organisation. |
| Submission | Part A: by 11:55pm AEST Friday end Module 4.1 (Week 7) Part B: Module 4.2 (Week 8) to be presented during class time (in person classes) or submitted as a video recording by 11:55pm AEST Friday (online classes) |
| Weighting | Part A: 25% Part B: 15% |
| Total Marks | 100 marks |
Context The development of your professional skills includes researching information systems to assist with organisational issues that are encountered in contemporary business.
You will be learning important ‘agile’ skills to assist in the workplace, such as scrum meetings
Purpose: To conduct research in response to current business issues that your organisation will present.
This project will require you to respond to a specific business issue that is presented to you and then design, collect, analyse, interpret, report and present data back to the business via your report. The case study is a real business. A detailed case study will be distributed in class during Module 3.1.
Task Instructions • Form groups of 3-5 members. PART A Group Report:
Introduction to Chanel
Chanel is a French luxury fashion house that was founded by Coco Chanel in 1910. It focuses on women’s high fashion and ready to wear clothes, luxury goods, perfumes and accessories.
The company is currently privately owned by the Wertheimer family This is one of the last family businesses in the world of fashion and luxury with revenues of €12.8 billion (2019) and net income €2,14 billion (2019).
Chanel – Case Study To complete this assessment task you are required to design an information system for Chanel to assist with their business. You have discussed Porter’s Value Chain in class and you should understand the primary and support activities within businesses. For this assessment you need to concentrate on Marketing and Sales and how Chanel cannot survive without a Digital Strategy.
Figure 1: Porter’s Value Chain Model
Source: Porter’s Value Chain Model (Rainer & Prince, 2019),
Read the Chanel case study which will be distributed in Class during Module 3.1. Visit these websites
https://www.dnb.com/business-directory/company- profiles.chanel.c17e7e5c74a842d90acdeb6cf13e86b6.html
https://www.voguebusiness.com/companies/chanel-invested-1-billion-in-a-pandemic-full-year- 2020-earnings?utm_source=Vogue+Business&utm_campaign=e1a3a4a1eb- 6WE+WED+16+JUNE+%E2%80%94+Future+of+food+%26+fashion+re&utm_medium=email&utm_te rm=0_5d1e7914df-e1a3a4a1eb-58977880
https://www.thefashionlaw.com/in-third-ever-financial-report-chanel-says-it-generated-12-8- billion-in-sales-in-2019/
- to understand the business and where you, as consultants, can add value by improving their information systems in marketing and sales.
Based on the information provided as well as your own research (reading!) into information systems write a report for Chanel to assist them in developing a ‘Digital Strategy’ to develop insights for their marketing and sales especially in online sales.
Please structure the group report as follows:
- Title page
- Introduction
- Background to the issue you plan to solve
- Identify and articulate the case for a Digital Strategy at Chanel (based upon the data do you as a group of consultants agree or disagree)
- Research the issues at Chanel and present a literature review – discuss the marketing and sales data analysis needs and the range of BI systems available to meet these needs.
- Recommended Solution – explain the proposed Digital Strategy and information systems and how it will assist the business. You may use visuals to represent your ideas.
- Conclusion
- References (quality and correct method of presentation. You must have a minimum of 15 references)
Appendices should include: ‘scrum’ meeting minutes and ‘scrum’ meeting notes: During the Trimester you will hold scrum meetings in your groups (in class or online in a discussion thread). Each group has five minutes to state what they have done and what they plan to do in the next week (each person in the group is required to speak every week). Any issues can be addressed in this time and groups are required to take minutes and update their status every scrum meeting. These meeting minutes then need to be attached to the report as an appendix.
PART B Presentation: Your group is required to present your proposed ‘Digital Strategy’ for the business in a ten (10) minute presentation pitched as though your lecturer is the client and you are selling the idea of your ‘Digital Strategy’.
Every group member must present a minimum of 2.5 minutes with an overall maximum of six slides (plus a reference list).
The presentation is ten (10) minutes with an additional five (5) minutes for questions in in-person classes.
Online students are advised to attempt to anticipate what questions might be asked by an audience, and answer them during their recording.
ALL STUDENTS MUST ATTEND THE PRESENTATION. Special consideration (SC) must be sought if you are unable to attend. If you do not attend you will not receive any marks for this part of the assignment (unless SC is approved).
Referencing
It is essential that you use appropriate APA style for citing and referencing research. Please see more information on referencing here http://library.laureate.net.au/research_skills/referencing
Submission Instructions
Submit your group report via the Assessment 2 link in the main navigation menu in MIS500: Foundations of Information Systems. The Learning Facilitator will provide feedback via the Grade Centre in the LMS portal. Feedback can be viewed in My Grades.
Academic Integrity Declaration
Group assessment:
We declare that except where we have referenced, the work we are submitting for this assessment task is our own work. We have read and are aware of Torrens University Australia Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure viewable online at http://www.torrens.edu.au/policies-and-forms
We are aware that we need to keep a copy of all submitted material and their drafts, and we will do so accordingly.
Assessment Rubric – PART A
| Assessment Attributes | Fail (Yet to achieve minimum standard) 0-49% | Pass (Functional) 50-64% | Credit (Proficient) 65-74% | Distinction (Advanced) 75-84% | High Distinction (Exceptional) 85-100% |
| Title and Introduction Percentage for this criterion = 10% | No title or “Assignment 2”. No introduction is attempted. | Title is not clear and/or relevant. A weak or non-existent introduction of topic. The paper’s purpose is unclear/thesis is weak or missing. | Title is not clear but attempt is made. A basic introduction that states topic but lacks interest. The thesis is somewhat clear and arguable. | Title has been attempted but needs editing to be clearer. A proficient introduction that is interesting and states topic. The thesis is clear and arguable statement of position. | Title clearly states the intent of the report. Exceptional introduction that grabs interest of reader and states topic. The thesis is exceptionally clear, well-developed, and a definitive statement. |
| Issue and research question Percentage for this criterion = 5% | No clear identification of an issue or research question. | The report does not clearly address the objective(s) and no research question is identified. | The purpose and objective of the report is made clear, and addresses the objective(s). No research question is identified. | The purpose and objective of the report is made clear, and addresses the objective. Research question is identified. | The purpose and objective of the report is made clear, and it addresses the objecti ve(s) in a focused and logic al manner. A well- articulated research question. |
| Evidence based discussion and critical analysis 25% | Effort considered inferior to the required minimum standard. No attempt at a discussion or critical review. No attempt at analysis. | Information is gathered from a single source. Lacks a basic knowledge of the field; selected sources irrelevant to project; misinterprets sources. Limited or no connections made between evidence and thesis. Lack of analysis. | Information is gathered from a limited number of sources. Demonstrates a basic knowledge of the field; selected sources relevant to project. Some connections made between evidence and thesis. Some analysis but improvements can be made. | Information is gathered from multiple sources. Demonstrates proficient knowledge of the field; thorough selection of sources pertinent to project. Consistent connections made between evidence and thesis. Overall, good analysis. | Information is gathered from multiple, research- based sources. Demonstrates exceptional depth of knowledge of the field; Comprehensive use of most recent and seminal sources) Exceptionally critical, relevant and consistent |
| Assessment Attributes | Fail (Yet to achieve minimum standard) 0-49% | Pass (Functional) 50-64% | Credit (Proficient) 65-74% | Distinction (Advanced) 75-84% | High Distinction (Exceptional) 85-100% |
| connections made between evidence and thesis. Excellent analysis. | |||||
| Description of Solution and justification of recommendation 30% | Solution was not clear. | Ideas were unclear. Little evidence of creativity or originality. Evidence used does not clearly support the main argument. | Ideas were relevant and stated. Appropriate concepts were included. Demonstrated knowledge of the key issues. Ideas were not as creative as they could be. Mid-level originality. Connection between argument and evidence is not clearly articulated in all cases. | Ideas were relevant and clearly stated. Appropriate concepts were included. Demonstrated competence and knowledge of the key issues. Ideas were somewhat creative. Good level of originality. Evidence used to support the central point is well chosen, though not particularly rich or detailed. | Ideas were all relevant and clearly stated. Appropriate concepts were included and integrated effectively. Demonstrated competence and knowledge of the key issues. Ideas were creative. High level of originality. Evidence used to support the central point is rich, detailed and well chosen. |
| Conclusion 10% | Not attempted. | Recommendations do not clearly flow from the document, and/or miss key findings. They are not well organised. | Conclusions are mostly relevant and are linked to the results of the document. Recommendations do not clearly flow from the document, and/or miss key findings. They are not well organised. | Conclusions are relevant and portray the results of the document. Recommendations, if applicable, are specific, action-oriented suggestions, oriented to topic. Recommendations logically flow from the document but the logic may not always be clear. | Conclusions are relevant and accurately portray the results of the document. Recommendations if applicable are specific, action-oriented suggestions, oriented to the topic, and relevant. Recommendations logically flow from the document in a manner which is evident to the reader. |
| Assessment Attributes | Fail (Yet to achieve minimum standard) 0-49% | Pass (Functional) 50-64% | Credit (Proficient) 65-74% | Distinction (Advanced) 75-84% | High Distinction (Exceptional) 85-100% |
| Appendix Percentage for this criterion = 5% | Not attempted. | Not all minutes are attached. | Not all minutes (only 1 missing) are attached but standard is good to average | All minutes from scrum meeting attached and are of a good standard. Some minor issues | All minutes from scrum meeting attached and are of a high standard. |
| Use of academic and discipline conventions Percentage for this criterion = 15% | Reader has difficulty following the document. Demonstrates inconsistent use of good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas. Referencing is omitted or does not resemble APA. | Poor grammar, spelling and punctuation. Low readability of document. Demonstrates use of credible and relevant resources to support and develop ideas, but these are not always explicit or well developed. Referencing resembles APA, with frequent or repeated errors. | Communicates in a coherent and readable manner that adheres to the given format. Accurately employs specialised language and terminology. Meaning is easy to follow. Information, arguments and evidence are structured and sequenced in a way that is clear and logical. Occasional minor errors present in spelling, grammar and/or punctuation. | Communicates coherently and concisely in a manner that adheres to the given format. Accurately employs a wide range of specialised language and terminology. Engages audience interest. Information, arguments and evidence are structured and sequenced in a way that is, clear and persuasive. Spelling, grammar and punctuation are free from errors. Demonstrates use of good quality, credible and relevant resources to support and | Communicates eloquently. Expresses meaning coherently, concisely and creatively within the given format. Discerningly selects and precisely employs a wide range of specialised language and terminology. Engages and sustains audience’s interest. Information, arguments and evidence are insightful, persuasive and expertly presented. Spelling, grammar and punctuation are free from errors. Demonstrates use of high- quality, credible and |
| Assessment Attributes | Fail (Yet to achieve minimum standard) 0-49% | Pass (Functional) 50-64% | Credit (Proficient) 65-74% | Distinction (Advanced) 75-84% | High Distinction (Exceptional) 85-100% |
| Demonstrates use of credible resources to support and develop ideas. Referencing resembles APA, with occasional errors. | develop arguments and statements. Show evidence of wide scope within the organisation for sourcing evidence. APA referencing is free from errors. | relevant resources to support and develop arguments and position statements. Show evidence of wide scope within and without the organisation for sourcing evidence. APA referencing is free from errors. |
PART B
| Assessment Attributes | Fail (Yet to achieve minimum standard) 0-49% | Pass (Functional) 50-64% | Credit (Proficient) 65-74% | Distinction (Advanced) 75-84% | High Distinction (Exceptional) 85-100% |
| Introduction An accurate statement of the purpose of the presentation is provided and the team are introduced. A brief introduction to the topic is provided and the structure of the remainder of the presentation is outlined. Percentage for this criterion = 15% | Further work is required to meet the minimum standard. | Acceptable but has room for improvement to meet criteria standards to fullest potential. Requires consistent development of criteria elements to reach next level. | Still has room for growth to be completely satisfactory. Has potential to reach the next level but development still requires more application to fully satisfy criteria requirements. | Completely satisfactory. Has elements of excellence but needs to be consistent across all criteria requirements. | Outstanding application of effort. Criteria requirements fully achieved. |
| Background A discussion and critical analysis of related literature/background material is presented. Multiple high quality references are used to underpin key points Percentage for this criterion = 15% | Further work is required to meet the required minimum standard. | Acceptable but has room for improvement to meet criteria standards to fullest potential. Requires consistent development of criteria elements to reach next level. | Still has room for growth to be completely satisfactory. Has potential to reach the next level but development still requires more application to fully satisfy criteria requirements. | Completely satisfactory. Has elements of excellence but needs to be consistent across all criteria requirements | Outstanding application of effort. Criteria requirements fully achieved. |
| Solution A discussion of results is presented with evidence based recommendations responding to stakeholder needs are presented. Recommendations are feasible and will deliver business value for the organisation. | Further work is required to meet the required minimum standard. | Acceptable but has room for improvement to meet criteria standards to fullest potential. Requires consistent development | Still has room for growth to be completely satisfactory. Has potential to reach the next level but development still requires more | Completely satisfactory. Has elements of excellence but needs to be consistent across all criteria requirements. | Outstanding application of effort. Criteria requirements fully achieved. |
| Assessment Attributes | Fail (Yet to achieve minimum standard) 0-49% | Pass (Functional) 50-64% | Credit (Proficient) 65-74% | Distinction (Advanced) 75-84% | High Distinction (Exceptional) 85-100% |
| Percentage for this criterion = 40% | of criteria elements to reach next level. | application to fully satisfy criteria requirements. | |||
| Presentation A confident and clear presentation by each team member contributing to a cohesive project pitch accurately reflecting project outcomes and responding to stakeholder requirements. Team members respond to panel questions and feedback and can clearly articulate their contribution to the project Percentage for this criterion = 20% | Further work is required to meet the required minimum standard | Acceptable but has room for improvement to meet criteria standards to fullest potential. Requires consistent development of criteria elements to reach next level. | Still has room for growth to be completely satisfactory. Has potential to reach the next level but development still requires more application to fully satisfy criteria requirements | Completely satisfactory. Has elements of excellence but needs to be consistent across all criteria requirements | Outstanding application of effort. Criteria requirements fully achieved. |
| Slides Slides created to a clear, creative and professional standard. Percentage for this criterion = 10% | Further work is required to meet the required minimum standard. | Acceptable but has room for improvement to meet criteria standards to fullest potential. Requires consistent development of criteria elements to reach next level. | Still has room for growth to be completely satisfactory. Has potential to reach the next level but development still requires more application to fully satisfy criteria requirements. | Completely satisfactory. Has elements of excellence but needs to be consistent across all criteria requirements. | Outstanding application of effort. Criteria requirements fully achieved. |
