ENGM115 Organisations and Systems

Assignment Brief 2021-22

Canvas Turnitin Submission Deadline: Tuesday 1st March 2022 by 2pm

MODULE LEADERS Dr Sam / Atonye

Manesha PeirisEndeley
& Sam Saghiri

ASSIGNMENT: One of One

TITLE OF ASSIGNMENT: Assignment 1

READ ALL INSTRUCTIONS AND INFORMATION CAREFULLY.

This assignment contributes 100% to your final mark.

Please ensure that you retain a duplicate of your assignment. We are required to send
samples of the student work to the external examiners for moderation purposes. It will also
safeguard in the unlikely event of your work going astray.

All assignments submitted via Canvas will automatically be checked via the Turnitin system,
which will produce a report on the level of similarity within the assignment.

THE LEARNING OUTCOMES WILL BE ASSESSED AS FOLLOWS:

Knowledge
K1. A critical comprehension of appropriate

methods and tools to understand organisations and systems.

K2. Awareness of modelling methods and tools.

Skills
S3. The ability to select and apply appropriate methods and tools to understand organisational
systems.

Page 1 of 9
IMPORTANT INFORMATION
You are required to submit your work within the bounds of the University Infringement of
Assessment Regulations (see your Programme Guide). Plagiarism, paraphrasing and
downloading large amounts of information from external sources, will not be tolerated and will
be dealt with severely. Although you should make full use of any source material, which
would normally be an occasional sentence and/or paragraph (referenced) followed by your
own critical analysis/evaluation. You will receive no marks for work that is not your own.

Where you are asked to submit an individual piece of work, the work must be entirely your
own. The safety of your assessment is your responsibility. You must not permit another
student access to your work.

Where referencing is required, unless otherwise stated, the Harvard referencing system must
be used (see your Programme Guide).

Submission Date and Time Please see1CANVAS

Tuesday st
March 2022 by 2pm

Submission Location Canvas Turnitin

ASSIGNMENT INSTRUCTIONS

The assignment is made up of two Part 1 and Part 2. You are

required to complete both parts.

Part 1 (70%) f Organisations and Systems analysis f

Tools/Techniques f Critical appraisal (2,400 words + - 10%)

The tools and techniques covered within the module organisations and systems are
aimed at investigating, understanding and modelling of organisations and systems.

You are therefore required to critique each of the following tools and techniques
(please note each tool and technique has an equal weighting) and critically discuss
how each of the tools/techniques might be used in analysing the Volvo Self-Driving
(Autonomous) Car Project. See below for further information.
Tools:
1. SWOT Analysis
2. PESTEL
3. Porters Five Forces analysis
4. Data Modelling
5. Process Modelling
Techniques:
1. Interviewing (as part of an investigatory study)
2. Questionnaires (as part of an investigatory study)

Page 2 of 9
Appendices
In addition you are required to submit appendices which represent evidence of the
practical application to the tools to the given case study, which you should also refer
to in the main body of the appraisal. Please note that each appendix submitted must
have been clearly developed by yourself.
(Please note appendices do not count towards the word count)

Case Study Information

The Volvo Self-Driving Car Project aims to develop and sell Cars with LIDAR based
safety technology and a self-driving highway feature to customers by 2022. The self-
driving highway feature (Highway Pilot), part of a big platform update, will have a
scalable product architecture (SPA2) which will be part of the next generation Volvo
XC90 SUV, also underpinning the electric vehicle range Polestar 3 SUV and XE40
Recharge.
Using the Volvo Self-Driving Car Project as the basis for your work, conduct
analyses using each of the tools (1-5) and techniques (1-2) listed above.
The following links will provide initial guidance on the project but you will need to
research the case study topic (and relevant tools and techniques) further using the
academic literature.
https://www.theverge.com/2020/5/6/21248415/volvo-luminar-lidar-self-driving-
highway-pilot-spa2
https://www.forbes.com/sites/samabuelsamid/2021/06/24/next-gen-electric-volvo-
flagship-to-feature-luminar-iris-lidar-as-standard-equipment/
https://www.cbinsights.com/research/autonomous-driverless-vehicles-corporations-
list/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_uK8SEyp-1Y

Part 2 (20%) f Organisational and Systems analysis f

Tools/Techniques applied (600 words + - 10%)

Part 2 of the assignment is split into two parts (part 2a and part 2b) and can be
based on (in) an automotive manufacturing organisation of your choice:

Part 2a. f Soft Systems - Rich Picture (10%)

Choose an automotive manufacturing organisation and generate a qRich Picturer
which portrays the customer/supplier/manufacturer relationship e.g. Nissan
Manufacturing UK. Your analysis should be drawn from the perspective (viewpoint)
of the customer who is using the products or services and should consider points of
potential conflict and inter connectivity between the different parties, customer /
supplier /Manufacturer.

Page 3 of 9
Please state any assumptions you make when producing the model.

Part 2b. f Workshop Planning (10%)

You have been asked to plan a 90 minute workshop involving staff from the
automotive manufacturing organisation of your choice (as selected for part 2a
above). This workshop aims to develop a better working relationship between the
management and staff within the organisation, prior to the introduction of new
working practices. You are therefore required to set out a plan and briefly discuss
how you would run this workshop, from the opening introductions to facilitating the
discussion and finally to how it would be concluded. This can be submitted bullet
point form and a maximum of three pages long.

Page 4 of 9
GENERAL INFORMATION

References
The assignment should be written in a report format i.e. with an introduction, main
body (Part 1. Part 2 [Part 2a. Part 2b].), summary section, list of references. The
report should have a clear structure with headings and sub-headings. It is expected
that you will use appropriate academic literature (journal articles and conference
papers) to support your critical evaluation and findings. All supporting sources of
information must be cited in the report and should be correctly referenced utilising
the Harvard Reference System.

An assignment should use at least ten academic literature references.

A good assignment will have at least sixteen academic references and a really good
assignment will have a lot more.

Except in exceptional circumstances all references must be less than ten years old.

References from commercial, YouTube and other web pages are to be used very
sparingly and will not be counted as an academic literature reference. Excessive
use of such web pages will be reflected in a reduction of the use of references mark,
due to using non-academic references.

A general reading bibliography must not be included.

The Harvard reference System must be used.

>V^ajgZ id jhZ i]Z @VgkVgY gZ[ZgZcXZ KnhiZb l^aa gZhjai ^c i]Z qMhZ d[ gZ[ZgZcXZhr
mark being 0 (zero). There will be no exceptions to this rule.
The assignment must be presented as a simple report and not an essay.

The report should be professional in its nature and of a high standard and quality.

Part 1 should be 2,400 words + - 10%.

Part 2 should be 600 words + - 10%.
The overall report should not exceed 3000 words in length + - 10%.

The reference list and appendices do not form part of the word count.

Page 5 of 9
L]Z gZedgi bjhi WZ ineZY ^c qL^bZh FZl JdbVcr( i]Z WdYn d[ i]Z gZedgi WZ^c\ -.ei*

The report should be single spaced.

The report must be uploaded to Turnitin using Canvas.

The uploaded assignment must include your name and University of Sunderland
student number on the first page, failure to do this will result in a reduction of the
presentation mark given.

Marks will be awarded as follows:

Element Weighting

Part 1 f Quality, relevance and

coherence of report narrative 45%

Part 1 f Use, interpretation and

relevance of references 25%

Part 2a p Application of tool (Rich 10%

Picture)

Part 2b p Application of technique 10%

(Workshop planning)

Parts 1, 2a & 2b p Logical sequence of 10%

presentation within the report and
presentation

See marking criteria sheet and marking sheet that is below.

Page 6 of 9
Marking Criteria Sheet

A - 70% and above

™ Thorough understanding of key theories and distinguishing features/factors and trends;
™ Overview of the field used as a basis for independent judgement;
™ Clear structure and good critical analysis;
™ Tool/Technique applied to an exceptional standard;
™ Appendices add significant value;
™ +points below.

B f 55-69%
™ Accurate description and understanding of the distinguishing factors;
™ Reasonable interpretative analysis of the factors;
™ Evidence of use of background knowledge and reading;
™ KdjcY higjXijgZ VcY \ddY q[adlr6
™ Presence of reasonable critical evaluation;
™ Demonstration of knowledge across substantive areas;
™ Tools and techniques applied to a good standard;
™ Appendices add value.
™ +points below.

C f 40-54%
™ Clear understanding of processes and factors;
™ Adequate structure and evaluative conclusion;
™ Question analysed and material relevant;
™ Grasp of basic issues in substantive areas;
™ Attempt to relate material to the essay or report question;
™ Some reading in evidence and appropriately incorporated;
™ Tools and techniques applied to a reasonable standard;
™ Appendices add little value.

D - F f 39% or less
™ Long on description with little or no analysis or evaluation;
™ Theoretical positions (concepts) lacking or confused;
™ Little evidence of use of conceptual tools or of reading;
™ Irrelevant, unrelated and muddled material.
™ Tools and techniques applied to a poor standard;
™ Appendices add no value / not present.

Page 7 of 9
Name Number

Quality, relevance and coherence of report narrative (45%)

Excellent Poor Appendices offer little insight

A B C D

Considerable critical evaluation Considerable critical evaluation

of report topic y y y y of report topic

References back up report No references to back up

discussion y y y y report discussion

Accurate, pertinent discussion Irrelevant, unrelated discussion

with reference to the question y y y y and/or material

Good coherent discussion Discussion is not coherent

y y y y
Appendices offer excellent Appendices offer excellent
insight y y y y insight

Comments mark /45

Use, interpretation relevance of references (25%)

Excellent Poor
A B C D

Reference use excellent with in Reference use poor and do not

text citations that develops the y y y y develop the discussion
discussion

Excellent interpretation of Very poor interpretation of

references y y y y references

A considerable number cited No references cited

y y y y
Comments mark /25

Tool (Rich Picture) applied (10%)

Excellent Poor
A B C D

Tool/ Technique applied Tool/ Technique applied

demonstrates excellent y y y y demonstrates little
understanding understanding

Comments mark /10

Page 8 of 9
Technique (Workshop planning) applied (10%)

Excellent Poor
A B C D

Technique applied Technique applied

demonstrates excellent y y y y demonstrates little
understanding understanding

Comments mark /10

General presentation, clarity and readability (10%)

Excellent Poor
A B C D

Logical and well formatted Illogical and without structure

structure y y y y
Excellent presentation and Very poor presentation and
quality y y y y quality

Comments mark /10

FINAL MARK /100

Page 9 of 9