MMM267 – Business Logistics
Assessment 1 – Research Report
DUE DATE AND TIME: Monday of Week 8, 03/05/2021, 08:00 PM AEST
PERCENTAGE OF FINAL GRADE: 40%
HURDLE DETAILS: N/A
Access the following website to select any ASX-listed mining/manufacturing/retail/service business organization that you would prefer to use for the purpose of this assignment
Research your chosen business organization’s operations and supply chain practices in depth and write a 3000-word research report based on your findings. For the business organization that you choose, first make sure that there is adequate information available about the organization in the public domain (company website, reliable third-party websites with relevant contents, etc). It is recommended that you select a large, well-known company rather than a small, obscure business. Typically, students have found large mining/manufacturing and retail companies to be ideal for this assignment from the point of view of accessing adequate data and information. Please bear in mind that you will need detailed operational/logistics information about your chosen business in order to write a comprehensive report as digital information retrieval is a key aspect of this assessment.
Your report should identify relevant sustainability aspects of the organization’s current operations and supply chain. In your write-up, you are expected to articulate accurate understanding and suitable incorporation of at least one relevant operations/supply chain management (SCM) theory or concept from the weekly lectures and prescribed topic readings up to Week 7 of the trimester.
Your submitted research report should specifically address/focus on the following four key aspects:
- Provide a brief descriptive profile of your chosen business organization (e.g., nature of the business, level of competition it faces, target customers, recent financial performance etc.)
- Identify some of the major suppliers/sources of supply for your chosen business organization and provide a descriptive analysis of the company’s current operational and
supply chain practices. ‘Current’ here can mean either before the onset of the Covid-19 pandemic or at present i.e., during the Covid-19 pandemic. In writing your descriptive analysis, it is very important that you clearly articulate your understanding of at least one aspect of OM/SCM theory as covered in the weekly classes up to Week 7 of the trimester. (Please do not try to incorporate everything covered in the classes up to Week 7 – you can pick and choose one or two relevant aspects of theory that best fits your research context).
- To what extent do you think are the business organization’s operations management and supply chain practices sustainable? What evidence can you find through your online research about the business organization’s ongoing relationship with its key suppliers? Provide recommendations to maintain/improve the sustainability of the organization’s operations and supply chain practices (you can assume either a pre- or post-Covid scenario).
- Sudden, unforeseen events with global ramifications can impact a business organization’s ability to source key raw materials and/or deliver finished products to target markets. This can be no truer than what we are seeing in the current world situation where the Covid-19 pandemic has severely impacted global supply chains. In your opinion, how resilient are the operations and supply chain practices of your chosen business organization to future disruptive events? What further recommendations can you give to improve their resilience?
Word limit: 3,000 words (+/- 10%) excluding tables, figures, list of references and any appendices.
Citations – academic and non-academic sources:
You must appropriately cite a minimum of six (6) academic/scholarly sources. These can include academic journal articles or chapters from academic books (including your prescribed textbook, which counts as ONE scholarly source). Suitable academic journals can be found by conducting a search of the Deakin Library academic databases. Please note that Wikipedia is not an acceptable scholarly source for the purpose of this assignment.
Much of the information regarding your selected organizations required can be obtained from only non-academic (sometimes identified as professional or industry) sources, which includes the organization’s own website. This is often the only way to find out up-to-date information about a business or organization. Any non-academic sources, if used, must be included in your reference list, but these will NOT be counted as part of your academic/scholarly sources.
Following are some of the suggested non-academic sources:
- Annual Reports
- Annual Reviews
- Media Releases
- Stock Market Analysis
Credible media websites (including but not limited to):
- The Age
- The Australian
- The Australian Financial Review (AFR)
- The ABC
- Business Review Weekly (BRW)
Deakin Library Homepage: →click on a-z databases and type the database name, choosing from these excellent options:
- IBIS World (industry market reports and company research)
- Factiva (articles in the media)
- TV news broadcasts
- TV documentaries
Any other non-academic sources e.g., credible personal interviews (please give full details if used).
Students must correctly use the Harvard style of referencing.
- Font: Size 12 Times New Roman, Calibri or Arial
- Line spacing: 1.5, no indentation, but one extra line spacing between paragraphs
- Margins of 2.54 cm
- Headings and sub-headings
- Alphanumeric or decimal outline/numbering system up to three levels for sections
- Page numbers: Roman numbering and Arabic numbering used appropriately
- Header and/or footer: student name, ID number, unit code and assessment task name
Suggested research report structure:
This is an academic research report and must therefore adopt a critical/analytical perspective. You need to research your selected organization thoroughly, demonstrate a sound grasp of the relevant literature and draw from a range of theoretical frameworks from your textbook/lecture materials/external research to inform and underpin your analysis. This critical analysis then flows on to the specific recommendations you make. A suggested research report structure is as follows:
- Title Page
- Table of Contents
- Executive Summary
- Background and Introduction
Please note that above structure is a suggestion only and students are allowed to depart somewhat from the suggested structure in accordance with their best judgment of how to present their work.
This task allows you to demonstrate achievement towards the unit learning outcomes. The ULOs are aligned with specific graduate learning outcomes – that is, the skills and knowledge graduates are expected to have upon completion of their studies – and this assessment task is an important tool in determining achievement of those outcomes.
If you do not demonstrate achievement of the unit learning outcomes, you will not be successful in this unit.
It is good practice to familiarise yourself with the ULOs and GLOs as they provide guidance on the knowledge, understanding and skills you’re expected to demonstrate upon completion of the unit. In this way they can be used to guide your study.
|Unit Learning Outcome (ULO)||Graduate Learning Outcome (GLO)|
|ULO 1: Articulate an understanding of the set up and management of an efficient and sustainable supply chain.||GLO 1: Discipline-specific knowledge and capabilities Appropriate to the level of study related to a discipline or profession.|
|ULO 2: Identify, evaluate and apply different approaches to supply chain management including the design and delivery of operations within a variety of different organisations using appropriate technology & tools.||GLO 1: Discipline-specific knowledge and capabilities Appropriate to the level of study related to a discipline or profession. GLO 3: Digital literacy Using technologies to find, use and disseminate information.|
|ULO 3: Explain and critically evaluate the role of supply chain management and its cross-relations with other organisational functions with a view to ensuring ethical & sustainable SCM practices.||GLO 1: Discipline-specific knowledge and capabilities Appropriate to the level of study related to a discipline or profession. GLO 4: Critical thinking Evaluating information using critical and analytical thinking and judgment. GLO 5: Problem solving Creating solutions to authentic (real world and ill- defined) problems.|
The marking rubric for this task is appended below. It is always a useful exercise to familiarize yourself with the criteria before completing any assessment task. Criteria act as a boundary around the task and help identify what assessors are looking for specifically in your submission. The criteria are drawn from the unit’s learning outcomes ensuring they align with appropriate graduate attribute/s. Identifying the standard you aim to achieve is also a useful strategy for success and to that end, familiarizing yourself with the descriptor for that standard is highly recommended. Students who submit their work by the due date will receive their marks and feedback on CloudDeakin 15 working days after the assignment submission date.
Extensions can be granted only for circumstances well and truly beyond your control such as documented serious illness or for compassionate reasons under special circumstances. Extensions can only be approved by the Unit Chair. Please email your request to the Unit Chair BEFORE the due date as noted on the Unit Guide and also at the beginning of this document. Please use an appropriate form to submit your request. You may be required to provide evidence to support your request and a draft of the work completed to date.
Please be advised that work or holidays or other assignments being due are NOT acceptable grounds for extension – you are expected to manage these issues as part of your studies. You are strongly encouraged to start early and to continually backup your assignment as you progress. Computer crashes or corrupted files will NOT be accepted as valid reasons for any extension at all.
If an extension is approved, you will be advised an appropriate length of time to submit your work commensurate with the reason you had submitted for requesting the extension. Any request for extension after the submission due date will need to be made via the designated online application system for Special Consideration – in such cases the Unit Chair cannot unilaterally decide an outcome.
Penalties for late submission: The following marking penalties will apply if you submit an assessment task after the due date without an approved extension: 5% will be deducted from available marks for each day up to five days, and work that is submitted more than five days after the due date will not be marked resulting in a 0 mark for the task. ‘Day’ means working day for paper submissions and calendar day for electronic submissions. The Unit Chair may refuse to accept a late submission if it is deemed unreasonable or impractical to assess the task after the due date.
You must keep a backup copy of every assignment you submit, until your assignment has been marked and you have received the mark and feedback. In the unlikely event that one of your assignments is misplaced, you will need to submit your backup copy.
Any work you submit as an assessable item will be checked via Turnitin – this include all works submitted after the original submission due date where a request for extension was approved.
You must be careful about submitting the right assignment. Please bear in mind that the assignment document CANNOT BE ALTERED after the due date has elapsed. So please double check that you are submitting the final, submission-ready version and not a previous work-in-progress version. Please remember that the file that gets finally submitted into the system will be the one that the markers will use – it cannot then be subsequently substituted with a different file. Also make sure that you are uploading the correct assignment file for this unit and not some other unit. If the assignment for a different unit is uploaded by mistake and requested to be replaced by the correct file after the due date has elapsed, then a commensurate late penalty will be imposed.
The Division of Student Life (see link below) provides all students with editing assistance. Students who wish to take advantage of this service must be organized and plan ahead and contact the Division of Student Life in order to schedule a booking, well in advance of the due date of this assignment.
Any material used in this assignment that is not your original work must be acknowledged as such and appropriately referenced. You can find information about plagiarism and other study support resources at the following website
Collusion occurs when a student obtains the agreement of another person for a fraudulent purpose with the intent of obtaining an advantage in submitting an assignment or other work. Talking about your assignment with other students is acceptable and encouraged. However, jointly writing up the assignment, or using the same written words from your discussion, is a form of cheating because the marker is not able to identify whose idea it originally is. Unauthorized collaboration involves working with others with the intention of deceiving examiners about who actually completed the work. While multiple students can select the same business organization, please note that any collaborative work will strictly not be acceptable as this is wholly an individual assessment task.
Plagiarism occurs when a student presents the work of another person as the student’s own work, or includes the ideas of others as quotations, summaries or paraphrases, without acknowledgement as to its authorship. It includes not only written works such as books or journals but data or images that may be presented in tables, diagrams, designs, plans, photographs, film, music, formulae, web sites and computer programs. Plagiarism also includes the use of (or passing off) the work of lecturers or other students as your own. Plagiarism is a form of cheating that Deakin University regards as an extremely serious academic offence. The penalties associated with plagiarism are severe and extend from cancelling all marks for the specific assessment item or for the entire unit through to exclusion from your course.
It is, however, important to realize that it is certainly not cheating to use the work of others in your research report. On the contrary – a well-constructed report should normally refer to and build on the work of others for positioning, supporting and strengthening your work and advancing knowledge. Plagiarism occurs when due recognition and acknowledgement of the work of others is not provided. Therefore, whenever you are using another person’s research or ideas (whether by direct quotation or by paraphrasing) you must appropriately cite the source. If you are ever in doubt about the most appropriate form of referencing, you should consult your lecturer or the Academic Skills Advisor. Please be advised that all assignments will be checked for plagiarism (via Turnitin) and disciplinary procedures will be initiated if any student’s work is found to include plagiarism. It is the responsibility of the student to be informed about the University’s policies on academic integrity and make sure they have received any mandatory training. For more information about academic misconduct, special consideration, extensions, and assessment feedback, please refer to the document Your rights and responsibilities as a student in this Unit in the first folder next to the Unit Guide of the Resources area in the CloudDeakin unit site.
Building your learning portfolio
Building a portfolio that evidences your skills, knowledge and experience will provide you with a valuable tool to help you prepare for interviews and to showcase to potential employers. There are a number of tools that you can use to build a portfolio. You are provided with cloud space through OneDrive, or through the Portfolio tool in the Cloud Unit Site, but you can use any storage repository system that you like. Remember that a Portfolio is YOUR tool. You should be able to store your assessment work, reflections, achievements and artefacts in YOUR Portfolio. Once you have completed this assessment, add it to your personal Portfolio to use and showcase your learning later, when applying for jobs, or further studies. Curate your work by adding meaningful, descriptive tags to your artefacts.
|Performance Criteria||N (0-29)||N (30-49)||P (50-59)||C (60-69)||D (70-79)||HD (80-100)|
|Presenting a descriptive profile of the chosen business organization ULO 1 (GLO 1) 5 marks||0.7 points Descriptive profile on the chosen business not presented. (0-1.4 marks)||2.0 points Descriptive profile is very inadequate and disjointed. (1.5-2.4 marks)||2.7 points Descriptive profile is presented but not in a very organized manner. (2.5-2.9 marks)||3.2 points Descriptive profile is presented in a somewhat organized manner. (3.0-3.4 marks)||3.7 points Descriptive profile is thorough and presented in a well-organized manner. (3.5-3.9 marks)||5.0 points Descriptive profile is thorough and presented in a planned and excellently well- organized manner. (4.0-5.0 marks)|
|Retrieving information on and providing a descriptive analysis of the current operational and supply chain practices of the chosen business organization. (At least one aspect of OM/SCM theory as taught in weekly classes up to Week 7 must be evident in the work). ULO 1 & ULO 2 (GLO 3) 10 marks||1.5 points No evidence of any relevant information retrieval and any description whatsoever. (0-2.9 marks)||4.0 points Little evidence of information retrieval and poor technical description evidencing almost no understanding of the relevant theory. (3.0-4.9 marks)||5.5 points Some evidence of information retrieval and attempted technical description but with major gaps evidencing a rather limited understanding of the relevant theory. (5.0-5.9 marks)||6.5 points Evidence of information retrieval and satisfactory technical description evidencing a basic understanding of the relevant theory. (6.0-6.9 marks)||7.5 points Evidence of information retrieval and good technical description evidencing a reasonable understanding of the relevant theory. (7.0-7.9 marks)||10.0 points Solid evidence of information retrieval based on thorough research and excellent technical description evidencing an advanced understanding of the relevant theory. (8.0-10.0 marks)|
|Critically analysing the overall sustainability of the operations and supply chain practices of the chosen business organization ULO 3 (GLO 4)||1.5 points No evidence of any analysis whatsoever. (0-2.9 marks)||4.0 points Some attempt of analysis but it is not logical or contextually relevant. (3.0-4.9 marks)||5.5 points Attempted critical analysis and logical argumentation but key issues not correctly identified due to a rather limited understanding of the subject matter.||6.5 points Critical analysis is logical and contextually relevant and identifies a number of key issues. (6.0-6.9 marks)||7.5 points Critical analysis is logical and contextually relevant, clearly identifying and addressing the key issues.||10.0 points Critical analysis is logical and contextually relevant, clearly identifying and addressing the key issues at great depth and detail.|
|10 marks||(5.0-5.9 marks)||(7.0-7.9 marks)||(8.0-10.0 marks)|
|Providing logical recommendations to the management to further improve the sustainability of the chosen organization’s operations and supply chain practices and building resilience against sudden disruptive events. ULO 3 (GLO 5) 10 marks||1.5 points No recommendations given. (0-2.9 marks)||4.0 points Recommendations are very few, incoherent and do not flow from the preceding analysis. (3.0-4.9 marks)||5.5 points Recommendations are somewhat coherent but appear random and not adequately linked to the preceding analysis. Little evidence of problem perception due to a rather limited understanding of the subject matter. (5.0-5.9 marks)||6.5 points Recommendations are coherent and linked to the preceding analysis. Some degree of problem perception evident in the recommendations. (6.0-6.9 marks)||7.5 points Recommendations are coherent, measured and well linked to the preceding analysis. Problem perception clearly evident in the recommendations. (7.0-7.9 marks)||10.0 points Recommendations are coherent, measured and extremely well linked to the preceding analysis. A very high level of problem perception clearly evident in the recommendations. (8.0-10.0 marks)|
|Following formatting instructions and compliance with Harvard referencing 5 marks||0.7 points None of the assignment instruction on formatting, referencing and length were at all followed or were followed correctly. Submitted work clearly missed the assessment brief. (0-1.4 marks)||2.0 points Most of the assignment instructions on formatting, referencing and length were not followed at all or followed incorrectly. Submitted work fell short of the meeting the brief. (1.5-2.4 marks)||2.7 points Assignment instructions on formatting, referencing and length were in general followed but there were a number of issues of non- compliance with requirements. Submitted work barely just met the assessment brief. (2.5-2.9 marks)||3.2 points Assignment instructions on formatting, referencing and length were followed with very few issues of non- compliance with requirements. Submitted work more or less met the assessment brief. (3.0-3.4 marks)||3.7 points Assignment instructions on formatting, referencing and length were followed closely with no noticeable issues of non-compliance with requirements. Submitted work met the assessment brief. (3.5-3.9 marks)||5.0 points Assignment instructions on formatting, referencing and length were followed meticulously with no issues of non-compliance with requirements. Submitted work accurately met the assessment brief. (4.0-5.0 marks)|
|Overall 40||N 0 or above||N 12 or above||P 20 or above||C 24 or above||D 28 or above||HD 32 or above|
Get expert help for MMM267 – Business Logistics and many more. 24X7 help, plag free solution. Order online now!