SBM1108 Business Decision Analysis

Page | 1
Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College
55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: 02-9318 8111
PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D
Approved:
Unit Code and Title: SBM1108 Business Decision Analysis
Assessment Overview
Assessment Task
Weighting
Due
Length
ULO
CLO
GA
Assessment 1: Laboratory work (Individual Assessment)
This task requires student to set-up decision problem in MS Excel and to write solution along with answers to some specific questions.
5%
Week 4
1 hour
ULO-1
ULO-2
ULO-5
CLO-1
CLO-2
CLO-4
CLO-7
CLO-9
GA-3
GA-7
Assessment 2: Laboratory Work and Short Answer Questions (individual)
This task requires student to simulate a decision problem in MS Excel and to answer some specific questions to show its relevance and impact on managerial decision making.
25%
Week 8
NA
ULO-2
ULO-4
ULO-5
CLO-1
CLO-2
CLO-4
CLO-7
CLO-9
GA-3
GA-7
Assessment 3: Comparative Review Report (Individual Assessment)
The task for this assignment is to review and summarise a given business decision making case or scenario from reading of relevant recent journal articles.
30%
Week 10
2000 words
ULO-1 ULO-3
CLO-1
CLO-2
CLO-9
GA-3
GA-7
Assessment 4: Applied Project (Individual)
This assessment requires students to Investigate, analysis and report on a business decision scenario. The investigation will consider designing and testing the decision model with suitable data for the business scenario. Students also require presenting their model in power point presentation format.
40%
Week 12
2000 words and PP presentation Slides
ULO-1 ULO-2 ULO-3 ULO-4
ULO-5
CLO-1 CLO-2 CLO-3 CLO-4 CLO-7 CLO-8 CLO-9
GA-1
GA-3
GA-7
GA-8
GA-11
Assessment Details
Page | 2
Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College
55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: 02-9318 8111
PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D
Approved:
Assessment 1: Laboratory Work
Due date:
Week 4
Group/individual:
Individual
Word count / Time provided:
1 hour
Weighting:
5%
Unit Learning Outcomes:
ULO-2, ULO-4, ULO-5
Course Learning Outcomes:
CLO-1, CLO-2, CLO-4, CLO-7, CLO-9
Graduate Attributes:
GA-3, GA-7
Assessment Details:
This task requires student to set-up decision problem in MS Excel and to write solution along with answers to some specific questions. The content for this laboratory exercise is based on week 1 to week 3 lecture.
Each laboratory session will have two parts: (a) problem set-up and calculation using MS excel and (b) question and answer. Students are also required to submit a soft copy of their work executed in Ms Excel separately at the end of the laboratory session. For easy identification, file must be saved as SBM1108_Lab #_SID. All questions must be answered in a booklet provided during laboratory session.
Students are required to study the material provided (lecture slides, tutorials, excel practice materials and reading materials), engage in the unit’s activities, and in the discussion forums. The prescribed textbook is the main reference along with the recommended reading material.
Marking Information: This assessment is marked out of 100 which accounts for 5% of your total marks for this unit.
Marking Criteria:
Laboratory: Probability and probability Distribution
Total marks: 100 (Theory :40; Simulation: 60) Marking Criteria Not satisfactory (0-49%) of the criterion mark) Satisfactory (50-64%) of the criterion mark Good (65-74%) of the criterion mark Very Good (75-84%) of the criterion mark Excellent (85-100%) of the criterion mark
Theoretical understanding (30 marks)
Questions are not correctly answered.
Some questions are correctly answered but most questions are partially correct.
Majority of the questions are correctly answered but significance of the result is not explained
Majority of the questions are correctly answered, and significance of the result is explained
All questions are correctly answered, and significance of the result is well explained to show its practical relevance.
Problem set-up in Excel (10 marks)
Fail to set-up problem correctly in excel
Problem is correctly set-up but all other relevant information, label and formula syntax is missing.
Problem is correctly setup in excel with all relevant information, but formula syntax is missing.
Problem is correctly setup in excel; all relevant formulas are shown with correct syntax, but labels are missing
Problem is correctly set-up in excel with all relevant information and labels. All relevant formulas are shown with correct syntax
Page | 3
Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College
55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: 02-9318 8111
PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D
Approved:
Simulation and result (40 marks)
No simulation is performed
Some part of simulation is correct
Most part of the simulations are correct.
Correct simulation but minor error in result.
Excellent simulation with correct result.
Result interpretation (20 marks)
No interpretation of result is presented
Average interpretation of results; no use of relevant management terminologies; fail to show the implication of result on a given problem
Good interpretation of results using relevant management terminologies but fails to show the implication of result on a given problem.
Interpretation of results is well presented using relevant management terminologies but fails to show the implication of result on a given problem.
Excellent interpretation of results using relevant management terminologies; show the implication of result on a given problem.
Page | 4
Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College
55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: 02-9318 8111
PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D
Approved:
Assessment 2: Laboratory Work and Short Answer Questions
Due date:
Week 8
Group/individual:
Individual
Word count / Time provided:
NA
Weighting:
25%
Unit Learning Outcomes:
ULO-2, ULO-4, ULO-5
Course Learning Outcomes:
CLO-1, CLO-2, CLO-4, CLO-7, CLO-9
Graduate Attributes:
GA-3, GA-7
Assessment Details:
This assessment requires student to solve given decision problem in Excel and to prepare power point presentation with embedded audio on their reflection about the problem, its implication and how they did it. Methodology used to solve the problem must be justified. Excel file and embedded audio in ppt need to be uploaded in Canvas using Turnitin.
Assessment Details:
This task requires student to simulate a decision problem in MS Excel and to answer some specific questions to show its relevance and impact on managerial decision making. The content of this exercise is based on week 5 to week 7 content.
Each laboratory session will have two parts: (a) problem set-up and simulation using MS excel and (b) question and answer. Students are also required to submit a soft copy of their work executed in Ms Excel separately at the end of the laboratory session. For easy identification, file must be saved as SBM1108_Lab #_SID. All questions must be answered in a booklet provided during laboratory session.
Students are required to study the material provided (lecture slides, tutorials, excel practice materials and reading materials), engage in the unit’s activities, and in the discussion forums. The prescribed textbook is the main reference along with the recommended reading material.
The question paper for this Assessment Task can be downloaded from the Canvas Website under Assessment 2 Items using the link.
Marking Information: This assessment is marked out of 100 which accounts for 25% of your final marks for this unit
Marking Criteria:
Simulation: Decision analysis and Linear Programming
Total marks: 100 (Theory :25; Problem setup, solution using Excel & Results interpretation: 75) Marking Criteria Not satisfactory (0-49%) of the criterion mark) Satisfactory (50-64%) of the criterion mark Good (65-74%) of the criterion mark Very Good (75-84%) of the criterion mark Excellent (85-100%) of the criterion mark
Theoretical understanding (25 marks)
Questions are not correctly answered.
Some questions are correctly answered but most questions are partially correct.
Majority of the questions are correctly answered but significance of the result is not explained
Majority of the questions are correctly answered, and significance of the result is explained
All questions are correctly answered, and significance of the result is well
Page | 5
Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College
55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: 02-9318 8111
PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D
Approved:
explained to show its practical relevance.
Problem set-up in Excel (20 marks)
Fail to set-up problem correctly in excel
Decision problem is correctly set-up, but all other relevant information pertaining to decision variable, constrains are missing.
Decision problem is correctly set-up in excel with most of the of correct & relevant information pertaining to decision variables and constraint but fail to present relevant constraints equations
Decision problem is correctly set-up in excel with majority of correct & relevant information pertaining to decision variables and constraint but fail to present relevant constraints equations
Decision problem is correctly set-up in excel with all correct & relevant information pertaining to decision variables and constraint. all relevant formulas are shown with correct syntax pertaining to constraint equations
Simulation and result (40 marks)
No simulation is performed
Some part of simulation is correct
Most part of the simulations are correct.
Correct simulation but minor error in result.
Excellent simulation with correct result.
Result interpretation (15 marks)
No interpretation of result is presented
Average interpretation of results; no use of relevant management terminologies; fail to show the implication of result on managerial decision making
Good interpretation of results using relevant management terminologies but fails to show the implication of result on managerial decision making.
Interpretation of results is well presented using relevant management terminologies but fails to show the implication of result on managerial decision making.
Excellent interpretation of results using relevant management terminologies; show the implication of result on managerial decision making.
Page | 6
Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College
55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: 02-9318 8111
PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D
Approved:
Assessment 3: Comparative Review Report
Due date:
Week 10
Group/individual:
Individual
Word count / Time provided:
2000 words
Weighting:
30%
Unit Learning Outcomes:
ULO-1, ULO-3
Course Learning Outcomes:
CLO-1, CLO-2, CLO-9
Graduate Attributes:
GA-3, GA-7
Assessment Details:
The task for this assignment is to review and summarise two decision models that is in practice relevant to a field of your interest such as construction, sport, marketing, housing, medicine, etc. For this purpose, students are required to search the relevant articles and /or case study using online database such as ProQuest or Harvard Business review. You must investigate and present a report on the business case, the decision-making process or model, the value added to the business, any relevant assumptions and advantages and disadvantages by the application of the model to the business scenario.
As a guide, you should research academic journals such as Interfaces, Decision Sciences, and Management Sciences. In addition, you may search articles through ProQuest and Google Scholar. In this individual task, you are required to summarise your findings in a table with appropriate headings which clearly show the above criteria. Normal referencing is expected in your review and your arguments must be supported with evidence from the literature.
The assignment is worth 30% of your final grade and therefore, to achieve a satisfactory result, you need to demonstrate strong commitment and diligence with this task. The assessment rubrics have been provided, so you should read these carefully to ensure you address the requirements at the designated standard.
Your final submission should clearly explain the scenario in non-technical terms and provide suitable conclusions or insights about what you have learned from this analysis and review.
A word on presentation and format: The paper submitted must not be more that 1500 words in length, include appendices for original tables, graphs and charts etc.
Harvard format references must be used.
Marking Information: This assessment is marked out of 100 which accounts for 30% of your total marks for this unit.
Page | 7
Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College
55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: 02-9318 8111
PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D
Approved:
Marking Criteria:
Comparative Review Report Marking Criteria Not satisfactory (0-49%) of the criterion mark) Satisfactory (50-64%) of the criterion mark Good (65-74%) of the criterion mark Very Good (75-84%) of the criterion mark Excellent (85-100%) of the criterion mark
The review is structured and provides a comprehensive analysis of the models or applications; criteria for the selection of the model applied to the business case are provided (40%).
The report shows limited structure and insufficient analysis of the main objectives. It shows insufficient use of literature as evidence and limited interpretation of the business case, models or applications.
The report has addressed the main objectives. There is some supporting literature use with limited interpretation of the business case, models or applications. Referenced critical analysis of the decision-making process was largely missing.
The report has addressed the main objectives. There is evidence of literature supporting the interpretation of the business case, the modelling or the applications used. Referenced critical analysis of the decision-making process was present but not best practice.
The report has thoroughly addressed the main objectives. There is strong reference to supporting literature in the interpretation of the business case, the modelling or the applications used. Indicates a sense of significant synthesis, of the problem. Evidence of independent research, clearly enunciated definitions and a validation of ‘best practice’ modelling and decision making
The report has fully and creatively addressed all the main objectives. Referencing of supporting literature in the interpretation of the business case, the modelling or the applications used is rigorous and enlightening. Indicates independent strongly argued coherently evidenced modelling with strong recommendations for ‘best practice’ implementation.
The review provides discussion of advantages, disadvantages and value added to business by the decision model or application (30%).
The review offers limited discussion of advantages and disadvantages, and value adding.
The review offers some discussion of advantages and disadvantages and begins to develop a value-added proposition.
The review offers adequate discussion of advantages and disadvantages, and a clear value-added proposition.
The review offers detailed discussion of advantages and disadvantages, and a well-developed argument to value adding modelling.
The report offers a comprehensive, lucid and convincing discussion of the advantages and disadvantages, and clear linkage to the value for the business.
Ideas and content are presented coherently with proper introduction and conclusion; Consistent formatting with suitable headings and sub-headings – Consistent use of labels, highlights, font weight and underline (15%).
The report demonstrates a limited sense of purpose or theme and insufficient understanding of the topic. Information is limited, unclear and the depth is not adequately developed. The idea is a simple restatement of the topic.
The report has attempted to define the topic.
An evidence-based approach is attempted but does not go far enough in expanding key issues.
The reader is left with questions. It requires further information to clarify main arguments.
Ideas are reasonably clear but could exhibit greater cohesion. The reader can deduce the line of argument but may need to interpret.
Ideas are explained thoroughly to support development of the arguments of the review. Accurate detail is used to support the main ideas and convince the reader of the argument who is left in no doubt of the purpose.
Ideas are clear and insightful. The reader understands the argument through the precise presentation and perceives a sense of the wider context of the ides.
Evidence of good academic writing: Free of any grammatical errors; using correct sentence structure; applying an
Writing lacks clarity and coherence. Points have not been paraphrased well. There are many errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation.
Writing is generally clear with some lapses in coherence. Some points have been paraphrased well. There are some errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation.
Writing is clear and coherent. Most points have been paraphrased well. There are some errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation.
Writing shows good clarity and cohesion. Points have been paraphrased well. There are few errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation.
Writing shows excellent clarity and cohesion. Points have been skilfully paraphrased. There are no or very few errors in spelling,
Page | 8
Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College
55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: 02-9318 8111
PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D
Approved:
extensive range of vocabulary; (5%)
grammar and punctuation.
Comprehensive Reference list – Appropriate Referencing using Harvard guidelines (10%)
The report is not referenced. Reporting verbs and connecting words are not used.
The report is referenced but contains errors or does not
follow Harvard referencing style.
Limited reporting verbs and connecting words are used.
The report is referenced in Harvard referencing style but may contain some minor errors. Some reporting verbs and connecting words are used.
The report is referenced in Harvard referencing style with few errors. Reporting verbs and connecting words are used well to create flow.
The report is accurately referenced in Harvard referencing style. Reporting verbs and connecting words are used very well to create flow and cohesion.
Assessment 4: Applied Project and presentation
Due date:
Week 12
Group/individual:
Individual
Word count / Time provided:
2000 words and PP presentation Slides
Weighting:
40% (30% report and 10% presentation)
Unit Learning Outcomes:
ULO-1, ULO-2, ULO-3, ULO-4, ULO-5
Course Learning Outcomes:
CLO-1, CLO-2, CLO-3, CLO-4, CLO-7, CLO-8, CLO-9
Graduate Attributes:
GA-1, GA-3, GA-7, GA-8, GA-11
Assessment Details:
This assessment requires students to investigate, analysis and report on a business decision scenario. The investigation will consider designing and testing the decision model with suitable data for the business scenario. Students also require presenting their models in class during separate presentation session.
In this group task, students are required to provide a summary of the literature review findings in a review format. As a guide, students should research academic journals, books or conference proceedings through ProQuest or Google Scholar. Normal referencing is expected in the review and the arguments must be supported with evidence from the literature.
The assignment is worth 40% of the final grade and therefore, to achieve a satisfactory result, students need to demonstrate strong commitment and diligence with this task. The assessment rubrics have been provided, so students should read these carefully to ensure they address the requirements at the designated standard.
Applied project includes two main components:
1. Decision Model Proposal
Investigation of two separate models that apply to a given industry or a simulation that can be modelled to a given industry: sport, medicine, manufacturing, airlines, scheduling, etc.
2. Decision Model application
Page | 9
Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College
55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: 02-9318 8111
PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D
Approved:
Students need to design and test their simulation model with suitable data for the business scenario. The model should be validated for its reliability. Data for simulation of LP, Regression, Decision Tree, Network distribution, Forecasting, etc., application from a business scenario, will be required for the walkthrough.
The final submission should clearly explain the scenario in non-technical terms and provide suitable conclusions or insights about what students have learned from this analysis.
The paper submitted must not be more than 2500-3000 words in length. Students also require to present (power-point) their models in class during separate presentation session.
Harvard format referencing must be used.
Marking Criteria:
Decision Model Proposal and Decision Model application Marking Criteria Not satisfactory (0-49%) of the criterion mark) Satisfactory (50-64%) of the criterion mark Good (65-74%) of the criterion mark Very Good (75-84%) of the criterion mark Excellent (85-100%) of the criterion mark
The proposed model provides a detailed analysis for the business problem requirements and includes constraints and assumptions for its application (20%).
The report shows limited structure and insufficient analysis of the main objectives. It shows insufficient use of literature as evidence and limited to interpretation of the business case, constraints and assumptions.
The report has addressed the main objectives. There is some supporting literature with limited interpretation of the business case, constraints and assumptions. Referenced critical analysis of the decision-making process was largely missing. insufficient
The report has addressed the main objectives. There is evidence of literature use supporting the interpretation of the business case, constraints and assumptions Referenced critical analysis of the decision-making process was present but not best practice
The report has thoroughly addressed the main objectives. There is strong evidence of literature use supporting the interpretation of the business case constraints and assumptions. Indicates a sense of significant synthesis, of the problem. Evidence of independent research, clearly enunciated definitions and a validation of ‘best practice’ modelling and decision making.
The report has fully and creatively addressed all the main objectives. Referencing of supporting literature in the interpretation of the business case constraints and assumptions used is rigorous and enlightening. Indicates independent strongly argued coherently evidenced modelling with strong recommendations for ‘best practice’ implementation.
The application and testing of the model provide a comprehensive analysis of the business problem and decision making (20%).
The application and testing show insufficient capabilities and interpretation of the business decision making requirements.
Logical description of the application to the business problem shows insufficient
The application and testing show some capabilities and interpretation of the business decision making requirements.
Logical description of the application to the business problem shows some evidence
The application and testing show adequate capabilities and interpretation of the business decision-making requirements. Logical description of the application to the business problem shows evidence of
The application and testing show strong capabilities and interpretation of the business decision-making requirements. Logical description of the application to the business problem shows evidence of
The application and testing show very strong capabilities and interpretation of the business decision making requirements. Logical description of the application to the business problem shows convincing
Page | 10
Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College
55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: 02-9318 8111
PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D
Approved:
evidence of capabilities in the walkthrough.
of capabilities in the walkthrough.
capabilities in the walkthrough.
capabilities in the walkthrough. It demonstrates significant synthesis of the problem, and evidence of independent research. A clearly enunciated set of definitions and a validation of ‘best practice’ modelling and decision making has been exhibited.
evidence in the walkthrough. Indicates independent strongly argued coherent evidenced modelling with strong recommendations for ‘best practice’ implementation.
Discussion of model reliability and decision-making justification with sensitivity analysis is presented (15%).
The report offers limited discussion on reliability of model and sensitivity analysis for the decision making of the business problem.
The report offers some discussion on reliability of model and sensitivity analysis for the decision making of the business problem.
The report offers adequate discussion on reliability of model and sensitivity analysis for the decision making of the business problem.
The report offers detailed discussion on reliability of model and sensitivity analysis for the decision making of the business problem.
The report offers a comprehensive, lucid and convincing discussion on reliability of model and sensitivity analysis for the decision making of the business problem.
Ideas and content are presented coherently, and the review is presented according to the Harvard referencing style (15%).
The report demonstrates a limited sense of purpose or theme and insufficient understanding of the topic. Information is limited, unclear and the depth is not adequately developed. The idea is a simple restatement of the topic. The presentation and referencing show insufficient application of the appropriate Harvard style guide and format.
The report has attempted to define the topic.
An evidence-based approach is attempted but does not go far enough in expanding key issues. The reader is left with questions. It requires further information to clarify main arguments. The presentation and referencing show some application of the appropriate Harvard style guide and format.
Ideas are reasonably clear but could exhibit greater cohesion. The reader can deduce the line of argument but may need to interpret.
The presentation and referencing mostly conforms to the appropriate Harvard style guide and format.
Ideas are explained thoroughly to support development of the arguments of the review. Accurate detail is used to support the main ideas and convince the reader of the argument who is left in no doubt of the purpose. The presentation and referencing conform to the appropriate Harvard style guide and format.
Ideas are clear and insightful. The reader understands the argument through the precise presentation and perceives a sense of the wider context of the ides.
The presentation and referencing is appropriate and consistent with the Harvard style guide and format.
Show group dynamics in preparing and presenting the report
(5%)
Unbalanced presentation or tension resulting from lack of group dynamics.
Evidence of group dynamics can be seen through handling the presentation among the group members.
Most of the members were dependence on reading off slides.
Evidence of good group dynamics can be seen. Primarily prepared but with some dependence on just reading off slides.
Very good group dynamics was evident by handling the presentation by the members,
Members helped each other.
Very well prepared.
Significant group dynamics.
All presenters participated equally and helped each other as needed.
Very well prepared and rehearsed.
Presentation slides
Visual Appeal (5 marks)
There are too many errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. The slides were difficult to read, and slides
There are many errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. Too much information
There are some errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. Too much information on more than three
There are few errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. Too much information
There are no errors in spelling, grammar and punctuation. Information is clear and concise on each
Page | 11
Asia Pacific International College Pty Ltd. Trading as Asia Pacific International College
55 Regent Street, Chippendale, Sydney 2008: 02-9318 8111
PRV12007; CRICOS 03048D
Approved:
contained information copied onto them from another source.
No visual appeal.
was contained on many slides.
Minimal effort made to make slides appealing.
or more slides. Presentation has good visual appeal.
on two or more slides.
Presentation has significant visual appeal.
slide. Presentation is
visually appealing/engaging
Presentation Topic knowledge/content (8 marks)
Presenters didn’t understand topic.
The presentation was a brief look at the topic, but many questions were left unanswered.
Majority of information irrelevant and significant points left out.
The presentation was informative, but several elements went unanswered.
Much of the information irrelevant; coverage of some of major points.
The presentation was a good summary of the topic.
Major information covered; presentation contain some irrelevant information.
The presentation was a very good summary of the topic.
Almost all-important information covered; presentation contain little irrelevant information.
Presentation was excellent and shows extensive knowledge of topic with comprehensive and complete coverage of information.
Presentation Skills (7 marks)
Unsatisfactory presentation with no clarity, appropriate pause, intonation and is not capable to engage listeners.
Satisfactory presentation with some clarity and pause.
Good presentation with clarity and pause in majority of speech.
Very good presentation with clarity and pause and able to engage listeners for most of the time.
Excellent presentation with clarity, pause, intonation and is capable to engage listeners all the time.
Presentation Preparedness (5 marks)
Evident lack of preparation/rehearsal Dependence on slides.
Simple presentation.
Dependence on slides for most of the time.
Good presentation and dependence in slide is minimal
Very well prepared and go beyond what is presented in slide.
Extremely prepared and rehearsed.


Buy plagiarism free, original and professional custom paper online now at a cheaper price. Submit your order proudly with us



Essay Hope