ASSESSMENT 3 BRIEF

Subject Code and Title MGT610 Organisational Best Practice

Assessment Case Study Analysis; Part C Reflective Journal

Individual/Group Individual

Length 1,000 words +/- 10%

Learning Outcomes The Subject Learning Outcomes demonstrated by successful

completion of the assessment below include:
c) Evaluate organisational performance against best
practice benchmarks and apply these benchmarks
to establish organisational improvements
d) Critically reflect on the holistic and systemic
importance that continuous improvement has on
sustainable outcomes

Submission By 11:55pm AEST/AEDT Friday of module 6.2 (week 12)

Weighting 25%

Total Marks 25 marks

Context
Strategy, benchmarking, best practice, and continuous improvement are constant concerns
for any organisation. In an ever-changing business environment, this means that every
initiative, successful or not, must be measured, reviewed, and reflected upon so that future
threats and opportunities can be identified and analysed against a deep knowledge of
previous efforts.

This assessment requires students to critically reflect on their earlier efforts to analyse a
potential strategic weakness and design a set of benchmarks to help future-proof the chosen
organisation. It asks you to compare your early assessment recommendations against the
theories and examples covered in the subject modules, and against the growth in
understanding you experienced through the unit. Such reflection should form that foundation
of a student’s professional body of understanding and practice.

Instructions

You will write a reflective essay focused on the relevance of what you have learnt through
this subject. This essay should include your personal reflections upon how you view the

MGT610_Assessment 3 Page 1 of 6
importance of strategy, benchmarking, best practice, and continuous improvement for long-
term business sustainability and how you believe the tools and methods available may be best
utilised as a business analyst and understood by executive management.

In writing this reflective journal you should draw on the learning resources provided during
the subject, further readings you have undertaken as part of your own research, your previous
assessments, the formative exercises conducted in class and/or online, and your personal
experiences and opinions formed in relation to this topic.

The reflective journal should critically review the topic at the highest level, which means
reflecting upon the importance of strategy, benchmarking, best practice, and continuous
improvement to business sustainability rather than upon the effectiveness of any particular
approach or tool. You should also reflect upon their relevance to a range of business types,
including corporate, B-Corporation, not-for-profit, and public sector enterprises.

Your reflective journal may take a variety of forms but must be within the word limit and
include:

1. Cover page
2. Introduction
3. Reflections on key theory from Modules 1 through to Modules 6
• The role benchmarks play in implementing and measuring an organisation’s
strategy?
• The role SWOT, PESTEL and competitor analysis play in helping to develop,
change and monitor an organisation’s strategy?
• What is the value of continuous improvement to help drive Best Practice?
4. Reflections on your Assessments and experiences
• What have you learned about applying tools for benchmarking to your
assessments?
• What have you learned from the feedback provided to you in your
assessments by the Learning Facilitator?
• How will you use benchmarks in your future career?
5. Conclusion
6. References

Referencing
You must recognise all sources of information; including images that you include in your work.
Reference your work according to the APA 7th edition guidelines. Please see more
information on referencing here in the Academic Writing Guide found via the Academic Skills
website.

MGT610_Assessment 3 Page 2 of 6
Submission Instructions

Submit your Assessment 3 Case Study Analysis Part C Reflection Journal via the Assessment
link in the main navigation menu of the subject in Blackboard by the due date. The learning
facilitator will provide feedback via the Grade Centre in the LMS portal. Feedback can be
viewed in My Grades.

The Learning Rubric below is your guide to how your assessment task will be marked. Please
be sure to check this rubric very carefully before submission.

Please note the following additional information

• You should adhere to the correct use of academic writing, presentation, and
grammar.
• It is important to check your similarity in SafeAssign. All sentences highlighted must
be either paraphrased in your own words or put in quotes and referenced
accordingly. You should be aiming for as low a similarity score as you can. Similarity
highlighted in a contents page, reference list or appendices is nothing to be
concerned about.
• It is important to adopt the appropriate use of the APA 7th edition style when citing
and referencing research. Please comply with all academic standards of legibility,
referencing and bibliographical details (including reference list).

Academic Integrity

All students are responsible for ensuring that all work submitted is their own and is
appropriately referenced and academically written according to the Academic Writing Guide.
Students also need to have read and be aware of Torrens University Australia Academic
Integrity Policy and Procedure and subsequent penalties for academic misconduct. These are
viewable online.

Students also must keep a copy of all submitted material and any assessment drafts.

MGT610_Assessment 3 Page 3 of 6
Assessment Rubric: MGT610 Assessment 3 Case Study Analysis; Part c
Fail
Pass Credit Distinction High Distinction
Assessment (Yet to achieve
(Functional) (Proficient) (Advanced) (Exceptional)
Attributes minimum standard)
50-64% 65-74% 75-84% 85-100%
0-49%
Knowledge and Some understanding of the
Limited understanding Thorough knowledge of Highly developed A sophisticated
understanding of theoretical concepts and
of required theoretical the theoretical concepts understanding of the understanding of the
business analysis and subject knowledge.
concepts and subject and subject. theory and subject. theory and subject.
benchmarking. knowledge.
Resembles a recall or Supports personal Discriminates between Systematically and
Key components of summary of key ideas. opinion and information assertion of personal critically discriminates
25% the assignment are substantiated by opinion and information between assertion of
not all addressed. Often conflates/confuses evidence from the substantiated by robust personal opinion and
assertion of personal research/course evidence from the information
opinion with information materials. research/course substantiated by robust
substantiated by evidence materials and extended evidence from the
from the research/course Demonstrates a
reading. research/course
materials. capacity to explain and
materials and extended
apply relevant concepts. Well demonstrated
reading.
capacity to explain and
apply relevant concepts. Mastery of concepts
and application to new
situations/further
learning.
Critical reasoning in Specific position
Specific position Specific position Specific position Specific position
defence of main (perspective or argument)
(perspective or (perspective or argument) (perspective or
argument. (perspective or is presented expertly,
argument) fails to take begins to take into argument) is expertly
argument) takes into authoritatively and
into account the account the issue(s) or presented and
account the imaginatively, accurately
25% complexities of the scope of the assessment.
complexities of the
accurately takes into
taking into account the
issue(s) or scope of account the
Justifies any conclusions issue(s) or scope of the complexities of the issue(s)
the assessment. complexities of the
reached with arguments assessment. Others’ and scope of the
issue(s) and scope of

MGT610_Assessment 3 Page 4 of 6
 not merely assertion. points of view are the assessment. assessment. Limits of
Makes assertions that
acknowledged. position are acknowledged.
are not justified. Justifies any conclusions
Justifies any conclusions reached with well- Justifies any conclusions
reached with well- developed arguments. reached with
formed arguments not sophisticated arguments.
merely assertion.
Evaluation of Limited understanding Resembles a recall or Supports personal Discriminates between Systematically and
information selected of key concepts summary of key ideas. opinion and information assertion of personal critically discriminates
to support main required to support substantiated by opinion and information between assertion of
Often conflates/confuses
argument. the reflection. evidence from the substantiated by robust personal opinion and
assertion of personal
research/course evidence from the information
Confuses logic and opinion with information
25% materials. research/course substantiated by robust
emotion. Information substantiated by evidence
materials and extended evidence from the
taken from reliable from the research/course Demonstrates a
reading. research/course
sources but without a materials. capacity to explain and
materials and extended
coherent analysis or apply relevant concepts. Well demonstrated
Analysis and evaluation reading.
synthesis. capacity to explain and
do not reflect expert Questions viewpoints of
apply relevant concepts. Information is taken
Viewpoints of experts judgement, intellectual experts.
from sources with a
are taken as fact with independence, rigor and Viewpoint of experts
high level of
little questioning. adaptability. are subject to
questioning. interpretation/evaluati
on to develop a
Analysis and evaluation
comprehensive critical
reflect growing
analysis or synthesis.
judgement, intellectual
independence, rigor and Identifies gaps in
adaptability. knowledge.
Exhibits intellectual
independence, rigor,
good judgement and
adaptability.

MGT610_Assessment 3 Page 5 of 6
 Effective Difficult to understand Information, arguments Information, arguments Information, arguments Expertly presented; the
Communication, for audience, no and evidence are and evidence are well and evidence are very presentation is logical,
Research and logical/clear structure, presented in a way that is presented, mostly clear well presented; the persuasive, and well
Referencing poor flow of ideas, not always clear and flow of ideas and presentation is logical, supported by evidence,
argument lacks logical. arguments. clear and well demonstrating a clear
25% supporting evidence. supported by evidence. flow of ideas and
Line of reasoning is often Line of reasoning is easy
arguments.
Audience cannot difficult to follow. to follow. Demonstrates cultural
follow the line of Shows good evidence sensitivity. Engages and sustains
Attempt made to include
reasoning. of attempts to source audience’s interest in
references in reference Show evidence of wide
information, with a the topic, demonstrates
Does not include list or in-text citations, scope within the
high levels of cultural
correct references in however these are sufficient number of organisation for
sensitivity.
reference list or in- sometimes insufficient for sources. sourcing evidence.
text citations; does research. Some errors in Effective use of diverse
Incorporates in-text and Incorporates in-text and
not use APA 7th style. the use of APA 7th style. presentation aids,
citations references citations references
including graphics and
from suitable sources; from suitable sources;
multi-media.
all referenced material all referenced material
is included in the is included in the Show evidence of wide
reference list; uses APA reference list; uses APA scope within the
7th style, however may 7th style, containing organisation for
contain minor citation minimal and or no sourcing evidence.
or referencing errors. errors.
Incorporates in-text and
citations references
from suitable sources;
all referenced material
is included in the
reference list; uses APA
7th style, containing
minimal and or no
errors.

MGT610_Assessment 3 Page 6 of 6