BM9720 Analytics for Competitive Advantage Component 2 Assessment Brief

BM9720 Instructions on Assessment:

Component 2 – Contribute 60% to the Module Mark

This component assesses MLO3, MLO4 and MLO5.

What to Hand In

• A case study individual report (2000 words) that documents the process of the entire case study, including a chosen data set, problems, data preparation, transformation, visualization, analysis, and critical evaluation and justification of the findings.
• Your case could be linked to your data set or any other company from your choice.
• Set strategic goals and demonstrate how business analytics could help you reach these goals and enhance the company’s competitive advantage.
• Choose one or more functional applications of analytics taught in the module and apply them to your chosen case.
• Online – file in a PDF format via Turnitin on Blackboard (You should also submit a zip folder as evidence of your analytics that can include your Excel spreadsheets, data sets or any other codes in the specified submission point)

The hand in is electronically via Blackboard, all deliverables shall be labelled with project name, your student’s
name and university number.

The report will be assessed on one or more:

• Understanding of different analytical techniques in functional areas/sectors (e.g., customer retention, supply chain, e-commerce, cybersecurity etc.)
• Review of relevant literature that addresses the chosen analytical tool and the functional area.
• The models/methodology that you developed for analytics.
• Justification of your competitive strategy and the analytics decisions.
• Consideration of professional, ethical and legal issues.

The report could broadly include the following sections:

• Abstract (Optional)
• Introduction: Introduce the chosen case context, the competitive advantage goals, data set and the chosen analytical tools and area of application) (5%).
• Case Profile: Briefly describe the context of this business, including the services/products they provide, their competitive position, market share, and the strategy they need to build a competitive advantage. (10%)
• Literature review: Refer to the previously published research that addresses the chosen analytical tool and the functional context. Please cover the essential book chapters and papers listed in the reading list, then you may add your own reading to support your argument and the analytical model that you adopt. (20%)
• Research Methodology:1) Data set and the analytical tool you used to draw your decisions.
  2) Analytical Model/approach that you developed to transform the existing business performance to a more competitive one (this might include data preparation, manipulation, analysis, visualization). (30%)
• Results & Discussion: Explain the results of applying your proposed analytical model on the data set and explain how this model leads to better results and a more competitive strategy. (20%)
• Conclusions and limitations: Critically Explain how your analytical tool and analytical model would help your chosen company to achieve their competitive advantage. (10%)
• References: Use APA Referencing Style and using the reading list for initial understanding of the key concepts. (5%)

Are You Looking BM9720 Assignment of This Question

Order Non Plagiarized Assignment

Mapping to Programme Goals and Objectives

This assessment will contribute directly to the following programme goals and objectives.

Knowledge & Understanding:

• Acquire, interpret and apply specialist functional knowledge in relation to their programme of study [PLO 7.4.3]

Intellectual / Professional skills & abilities:

• Demonstrate competence in contemporary analytical and ICT applications [PLO 7.1.3]
• Analyse and communicate complex issues effectively [PLO 7.3.1]
• Demonstrate decision making, problem solving and project management skills. [PLO 7.3.2]

Personal Values Attributes (Global / Cultural awareness, Ethics, Curiosity) (PVA):

• Demonstrate skills of analysis and synthesis in the application of research methods to the exploration of contemporary business and management issues. [PLO 7.5.2]
• Reflect on their own ethical values [PLO 7.2.2]

BM9720 Module Specific Assessment Criteria and Rubric

	0 – 39	40 – 49	50 – 54	55 – 59	60 – 69	70 – 100
Individual Report – weighted 60%	Report is either not submitted or completed to a poor standard. Report may be poorly presented or lacking supporting information. The core methods of data management and visualization taught in the module are not shown in the report. The report has very little relevant literature referred and cited. The report has very limited evaluation and discussion of the business insights of the results. Very limited consideration of legal, social, ethical, security and professional issues.	The report doesn’t have adequate technical quality. Produced and demonstrated a solution to the problem, which is flawed, despite some effort. Poor evidence of reviewing academic sources. Little evaluation and discussion of the results. Little consideration of legal, social, ethical, security and professional issues. Narrative difficult to follow. Poor quality of references and citations.	The student demonstrated a sound knowledge of the data management and visualization methods covered within the module and has produced a report which has a limited research base and could be presented more professionally. The student has provided a basic evaluation and discussion of the business insights of the results, but does this with a limited literature base and does not offer any critical analysis.	The student understanding of the data management and visualization methods is largely evident and report is generally well presented. Satisfactory technical quality. Produced and demonstrated good quality solution to the problem. Good evidence of reviewing multiple academic sources. Some references and citations. Good evaluation and discussion of the business insights of the results. Legal, social, ethical, security and professional issues fully considered.	Report is presented to a high standard and are easy to follow. Very good technical quality. Produced and demonstrated very good quality solution to the problem. Sufficient information for the reader is provided to reproduce the results. Very good evidence of systematic review using multiple high quality academic sources. Logical, clear development of narrative. Appropriate references and citations. Very good evaluation and discussion of the business insights of the results. Legal, social, ethical, security and professional issues fully considered.	Excellent technical quality report. Produced and demonstrated a comprehensive, high quality solution to the problem. Sufficient information for the reader is provided to reproduce the results. Outstanding evidence of systematic review using multiple high quality academic sources. Logical, clear development of narrative. High quality references and citations. Outstanding evaluation and discussion of the business insights of the results. Legal, social, ethical, security and professional issues fully considered.

ASSESSMENT REGULATIONS

You are advised to read the guidance for students regarding assessment policies. They are available online here.
Academic Misconduct

The Assessment Regulations for Taught Awards (ARTA) contain the Regulations and procedures applying to cheating, plagiarism, the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Systems, and other forms of academic misconduct.

The full policy is available here

You are reminded that plagiarism, collusion, the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Systems, and other forms of academic misconduct, as referred to in the Academic Misconduct procedure of the assessment regulations, are taken very seriously. Assignments in which evidence of plagiarism or other forms of academic misconduct is found may receive a mark of zero.

Late submission of work

Where coursework is submitted without approval, after the published hand-in deadline, the following penalties will apply. For coursework submitted up to 1 working day (24 hours) after the published hand-in deadline without approval, 10% of the total marks available for the assessment (i.e.100%) shall be deducted from the assessment mark.

For clarity: a late piece of work that would have scored 65%, 55% or 45% had it been handed in on time will be awarded 55%, 45% or 35% respectively as 10% of the total available marks will have been deducted.

The Penalty does not apply to Pass/Fail Modules, i.e. there will be no penalty for late submission if assessments on Pass/Fail are submitted up to 1 working day (24 hours) after the published hand-in deadline.

Coursework submitted more than 1 day (24 hours) after the published hand-in deadline without approval will be marked as zero but will be eligible for referral. The reassessment should where appropriate, and as determined by the Module Leader, be the same method (e.g. essay) but maybe with a different task (e.g. different essay title) or with the same task (e.g. the same essay title) as indicated in the Module handbook. In modules where there is more than one assessment component, Students are not required to complete all assessment components if an overall Pass Mark (40% UG, 50% PGT) has been achieved.

The only permitted exception will be in cases where the University is prevented from doing so by a PSRB requirement. In the case of PSRB requirements, a variation order will be required from the regulations.

In modules, where there is more than one assessment component and an overall pass mark has not been achieved, Students will be eligible for a referral* in the individual failed module and/or not attempted component(s) of assessment.

These provisions apply to all assessments, including those assessed on a Pass/Fail basis. The full policy can be found here
Word limits

The word count is to be declared on the front page of your assignment and the assignment cover sheet. The word count does not include:
 e.g. appendices, glossary, footnotes, tables

Please note, in text citations [e.g. (Smith, 2011)] and direct secondary quotations [e.g. “dib-dab nonsense analysis” (Smith, 2011 p.123)] are INCLUDED in the word count.
If this word count is falsified, students are reminded that under ARTA this will be regarded as academic misconduct.

For those assessments where students are required to keep to the word limit, it is proposed that they should be informed that the marker will stop reading at the point when they judge that the word limit exceeds the recommended word count by more than 10%. The marker will indicate the point at which they stop reading on the text.

Students must retain an electronic copy of this assignment (including ALL appendices) and it must be made available within 24hours of them requesting it be submitted.

The full Word Limit Policy is available her