1

London School
of Business &
Finance (LSBF)
Masters in Business Administration

Module

Systems and Operati ons Management
Assignment
Title
Systems and Operations Management - Critical Evaluation of the
Competitive Factors
Assignment Type Report
Word Limit 4000 - 4500 words
Weighting 100%
Issue Date 5th May
Submission Date 6th June
Issued by (Assessor) S M A Hashmi
Internal Verifier Junaid Shaikh
Plagiarism When submitting work for assessment, students should be aware of the LSBF guidance and
regulations in concerning plagiarism. All submissions should be your own, original work.
You must submit an electronic copy of your work. Your submission will be electronically
checked.

Harvard Referencing The Harvard Referencing System must be used. The Wikipedia website must not be
referenced in your work.
Learning Outcomes On successful completion of this assignment you will be able to:

LO Learning Outcome Description

Knowledge and Understanding

LO1
Critically appraise ways in which the operations and Information
Systems functions contribute to an organisations competitiveness
and strategic direction.
LO2
Synthesise and evaluate complex information on IT related issues.
LO3
Identify and justify the information required to establish and
implement effective operational decisions, with particular reference
to change management.
LO4
Describe and critically assess organisations from systems,
information and business process perspective.
LO5
Appreciate how key organisational behaviour concepts such as
structure, motivation, culture and work groups & teams impact on
and influence the role of people within the broad operations of the
organisation.


2

Scenario

You have been appointed as a consultant of an organisation of your choice (manufacturing or service based). The
company is about to embark on commencing its business in the UK. You have been asked to recommend as to how
the organisation should competitively develop and run its systems and operations with the help of people in the
organisation.

Your Task

In light of the above, carry out research on the competitors and real business environment in which the company is
going to operate and do as following:

1- Critically evaluate a suitable operations framework for the chosen organisation whilst focusing on the
relevant operations areas (e.g, strategy, operations design, capacity planning, resource planning, quality,
supply chain, or any other). (LO1, LO3, LO4) (40%).

2- Integrate an Information System within the organisations operations giving particular focus on CRM, supply
chain and knowledge management. (LO1, LO2, LO4) (40%).

3- Give recommendations as to how the organisations employees can be managed to enhance their
contribution towards the competitive running of the broader operations. (LO5) (20%).
















3
Guidelines
GUIDANCE ON ASSESSMENT

All materials must be properly referenced. Length required is advised above. Longer work will not be penalised.
However it should be noted that a concise and professional style which is well focused and clear in the points being
made will gain good credit. Originality, quality of argument and good structure are required. What I want to see is
that you can take a body of theory, understand it, choose what you want from it, apply it in a reasonable fashion
and hence evaluate it. Your submissions will be expected to demonstrate the following qualities:
1. Answering the central focus of the assignment topics.
2. Company you choose can be from any sector but you must provide some background and justification of
your rational. You will need to make assumptions where information is not available and this need to be
clearly outlined.
3. A critical appreciation of relevant literature and its use to support argument, substantiate model(s) and
other aspects of the assignment.
4. Taking ownership of the content, being prepared to debate and argue a personal position, evidences
evaluative skills. A submission made up of extracts from published sources which is descriptive and just
theoretical, is not acceptable. Your submission must have interpretation and consideration of the
challenges and issues of taking theory into practice (using cases and/or personal experience).
5. Ability to analyse relevant theoretical concepts in a critical manner, evaluation of material, indication of
gaps in the literature.
6. Logical flow of ideas and treatment; imaginative approaches; appropriate
selection of real world factors related to the model(s) or specific assignment topic.
7. Evidence of additional personal research, and the ability to analyse material from a variety of appropriate
relevant perspectives. A clear listing of references and/or bibliography.
8. Presentation, structure, appropriateness of methodology, breaking into section headings/subheadings,
tidiness.
9. A strong conclusion.
Please ensure that you reference material which you take from text books, published documents, internet etc in
the main body of your report, at the place you use it, as well as listing the publications in an appendix. Also, try to
evaluate and critique this material and the experience you get from applying and using it. Such personal critique
gains high reward in postgraduate level work!



4
Please note that just providing a summary of current published works on your chosen topic will not receive a high
grade. Ensure that your writing style is one in which you take ownership of the content. Evidence personal
evaluation this can often be achieved by evaluating prior experience or a case study within the context of the
theory.

































5

GRADING CRITERIA



Criteria
Weightin
g
100% 70%+100 60-69% 50-59% 0 -49% Fail
Generic skills:
communication
and
presentation.



Comprehensive and
correctly structured
assessment. Style of
writing is very fluent
and develops a
coherent and logical
argument. Excellent
referencing.
Well structured
report which
follows
appropriate
format but some
aspects of layout
and referencing
could be
improved. Style
of writing is fairly
fluent. Good
referencing.
Good report in most
aspects but suffers
from variations in
quality and the layout
contains some
inadequacies. Style of
writing is satisfactory.
Referencing needs
improving.
Very poor report
which is incorrectly
structured and
contains major errors
and omissions. Style
of writing lacks
coherence and
fluency. Poor
referencing.

Knowledge &
Understanding

Demonstrates
excellent knowledge
of theory and
provides critical
theoretical
underpinning. Very
good interpretations
and summarising of
main themes.

Wide range of
knowledge
demonstrated and
evidence of good
understanding of
the topic.

Ability to interpret
and summarise
succinctly.
Good range of
knowledge
demonstrated but
weaknesses in key
areas. Some
understanding
displayed of the topic.

Summary and
interpretation are
satisfactory.
Very poor range of
knowledge
demonstrated and
there are major
weaknesses evident
in interpretation and
understanding.

No clear
interpretation of
main themes.
Analysis

Excellent use of
theoretical and
conceptual models
to guide analysis
linked with a critical
discussion of main
themes.
Deconstructs the
major themes used
in the argument.
Very good use of
the theoretical
and conceptual
models with good
critical discussion
and application.

Good evidence of
deconstruction.
Use of theory and
concepts limited but
relevant. Application
could be improved and
there is a tendency
towards description.

Must provide more
evidence of
deconstruction.
Very poor use of
theory and very little
application of
concepts.

Very little description
with not much
evidence of analysis.


Synthesis/
Creativity/
Application

Logical presentation
of themes with
appropriate
examples being
demonstrated. Very
good demonstration
of synthesis. Models
have been clearly
applied to the
argument.
Very good
account of main
themes with
sound application.
Good attempt at
applying models
to the argument.
.Fairly good
attempt at
synthesising the
salient points.
Good account of main
themes with some
attempt at application.
Limited
evidence of synthesis.
Very poor account of
main themes with
little or no
application. No links
between models and
argument.


6
Evaluation

Shows clear evidence
of in-depth critical
reflection and
evaluation of the
argument by
providing a robust
defence of the
opinions presented
in the assessment.
Shows evidence of
critical reflection
and evaluation
and a fairly
cohesive defence
of the argument
Shows some evidence
of critical reflection
but could have been
developed.
Shows little or no
evidence of critical
reflection and needs
to be much more
developed. There is
no defence of the
opinions presented.