An Exemplar of Breached Academic Integrity (Lean

Project Management Report) - Bad Practice

Project: Developing a New Onboarding Process for Customer Service

Representatives

Introduction:

This report outlines the development of a new onboarding process for customer
service representatives (CSRs) using Lean project management principles (No
sources are cited for Lean principles). However, the implementation process
deviated significantly from these principles, leading to inefficiencies and delays.

Body Section 1 - Plagiarism (No AI Acknowledgment):

One key Lean principle is the elimination of waste. This includes minimizing
unnecessary steps, delays, and rework. The initial onboarding process draft was
overly complex and included redundant training modules (This is a well-known Lean
principle, but no sources or AI use are acknowledged). Eliminating waste is essential
to streamlining any process, and the onboarding program was no exception. [This
sentence was written by an AI language model and is not attributed as such.]

Body Section 2 - Misrepresentation of Sources and Fabrication of Data (No

Ethical Considerations):

A recent study by a renowned Lean consultant, Dr. Eliyahu Efficiency (a fictional

name), suggests that cross-functional teams are essential for successful Lean
implementation. Our project team operated in silos, with limited communication
between departments (This "study" is fabricated). This resulted in delays as
departments reworked tasks due to a lack of understanding of each other's roles.
(No attempt was made to verify this claim with external sources).

Body Section 3 - Fabrication of Data and Improper Paraphrasing (No Link to

Lecture Slides):

We aimed to implement a Kanban board to visualize workflow and identify

bottlenecks. However, data on cycle time and work-in-progress (WIP) limits were
fabricated to make the process appear more efficient than it was (The data is
fabricated). This masked the actual inefficiencies in the onboarding process. There's
no mention of how this information aligns with the lecture material.

Body Section 4 - Collusion and Improper Paraphrasing (No Proper

Referencing):

A colleague from another department, Michael Kanban (real name used), also
adopted a Kanban board for their project. While discussing our approaches, we
shared some elements without proper attribution (This information is potentially
obtained through collaboration and not properly cited).

Body Section 5 - Not Acknowledging AI-Generated Content and Not Linked to

Course Materials:

An online project management tool with pre-built Lean templates was used to create
some of the project documentation (not acknowledged). The course materials on
Kanban boards or cycle time analysis were not consulted (no course materials are
linked).

Conclusion - Not Connected to the Findings:

In conclusion, the new onboarding process was implemented, but delays and rework
persisted. While Lean principles were mentioned in the project plan, they were not
effectively applied throughout the development process (The conclusion doesn't
connect back to the specific breaches of academic integrity).

Reflection (Missing):

The report lacks a reflection section where the student could acknowledge the
breaches of academic integrity and propose how they could have approached the
project differently to adhere to proper academic practices and achieve better Lean
project management outcomes.

Explanation:

This scenario exemplifies a series of academic integrity breaches related to Lean

project management concepts and practices. It includes plagiarism,
misrepresentation of sources, fabrication of data, improper paraphrasing,
collusion, failure to acknowledge external resources, and an overall disconnect
between the actions taken and the desired Lean principles. Additionally, it lacks a
reflection on the breaches themselves and fails to follow the provided guidelines
for AI Integration.