You are required to undertaken secondary background research to better understand the nature of the Design Challenge. You are not making recommendations you are trying to better understand the nature of the problem

You are required to undertaken secondary background research to better understand the nature of the Design Challenge. You are not making recommendations you are trying to better understand the nature of the problem. You must include a reference list, formatted according to the RMIT Harvard style.

Design thinking is a problem-solving technique that works well when developing solutions to complex non-linear business problems. The design process starts with exploration. The first step is to gain an understanding of the nature of the problem by undertaking background research

The purpose of this assignment is twofold.

First,   you need to better understand the design challenge that has been set by our industry partner for this semester. You do this by researching what we already know. Google Scholar and library databases are the place to start. Collect a set of relevant peer reviewed references which have examined the challenge and find out what we already know.  We are not looking for solutions at this stage.

Some questions that you may ask to better understand what is being reported in the literature could be:  

i)              Why is it a problem in the first place, what makes it a problem?

ii)             ii) How did it become a problem?

iii)            iii) Who does it effect?

iv)           What do we know (facts) about the nature of the problem?

 

 

 Remember you are reporting what is known already, you must not make recommendations on what needs to be done. 

Second, you must demonstrate capability in preparing a formal academic secondary research report. This means you need to ensure that grammar, sentence structure, synthesis of information, coherence of explanation, and summation are at a level commensurate with a postgraduate MBA program.

Course learning outcomes

This assessment is relevant to the following course learning outcomes: 

·         CLO1  – Analyse and discuss the significance of design thinking, and its manifestations and implications across organisational contexts.

Assessment Details  

Weighting: 30%

Length: 3,000 words

This background research report is to be used by the design team to gain a broader view of the Industry Partner’s design challenge. It will also inform the reframing of the client’s problem.

The following structure is recommended for your report:

·         Abstract

·         Introduction

o    Statement of problem or issue

·         Body

o    What is important to know?

o    What is known?

o    What do we need to know?

·         Summary: the problem and what we know about the problem.

·         Reference list: formatted according the RMIT Harvard Style

The challenge is:

 

Business these days is not just about making money. More and more we are seeing organisations striving for a triple bottom line approach with social and environmental imperatives coming to the fore. Investors employees and customers are demanding transparency around social credentials and documented climate risk strategies.  Organisations are actively on the lookout for people that can help drive their sustainability agendas and are able to strike a balance between people, planet and profit.  Talent Nation specialises in identifying these types of employees and their challenge is to identify, assess and place these individuals. Talent Nation wants you to design a ‘best in class’ process for finding these people, screening them effectively based on values and capability, and support them through their career journey. This is not an app but a holistic solution bringing together people and technology for a seamless experience for the employees, the companies and the Talent Nation consultants.

 

The assignment rubric

 

 

MBA Background research report

MBA Background research report

Criteria

Ratings

Pts

This criterion is linked to a learning outcomePurpose

Understanding and addressing the task

6 to >5.0 Pts

Good response

Demonstrates clear understanding of the required task, and delivers an insightful, clearly articulated review.

5 to >2.0 Pts

Satisfactory response

Understands the task and the information but not all key points are included or fully developed

2 to >0.5 Pts

Unsatisfactory response

Does not demonstrate an understanding of the required task. Fails to identify enough of the literature to yield an informative review.

0.5 to >0 Pts

Poor

Not demonstrated

6 pts

This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeStructure

argument
introduction
conclusion
paragraphs

5 to >4.0 Pts

Good Response

Well organised structure, with supporting evidence, shows balance and consideration for the reader.

4 to >2.0 Pts

Satisfactory

There is a clear organisation to the paper, but not always logical or flowing. Conclusion attempted but does not appropriately sum up the argument presented; main idea not always clear.

2 to >0.5 Pts

Unsatisfactory response

Poorly structured structure no clear conclusion, lacks coherence.

0.5 to >0 Pts

Poor

Not demonstrated

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeResearch and reference relevant literature

5 to >4.0 Pts

Good response

Consistently integrates research and ideas from relevant and appropriate sources. Consistently clear, well integrated evidence using accurate paraphrase and summary. Consistently uses accurate references appropriate to the required task.

4 to >2.0 Pts

Satisfactory

Integrates research and ideas from relevant and appropriate sources. Clear, well integrated evidence using accurate paraphrase and summary. Uses mostly accurate references appropriate to the required task.

2 to >0.5 Pts

Unsatisfactory

Little evidence of understanding of the literature.

0.5 to >0 Pts

Poor

Not demonstrated

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a learning outcomePostgraduate Writing

Sentences
Grammar
Vocabulary
Spelling

4 to >3.0 Pts

Good Response

Consistently uses correct grammar (verb tenses, subject verb agreement, pronouns etc.) Consistent use of appropriate vocabulary ad sentence structure enabling unambiguous grasp of the meaning. Correct punctuation and spelling Communicates meaning through use of clear and unambiguous language.

3 to >1.0 Pts

Satisfactory response

Mostly uses correct grammar (verb tenses, subject verb agreement, pronouns etc.) Mostly use of appropriate vocabulary ad sentence structure enabling unambiguous grasp of the meaning. Correct punctuation and spelling Communicates meaning through use of clear and unambiguous language.Some errors but do not interfere with meaning.

1 to >0.0 Pts

Unsatisfactory response

Errors are frequent, making understanding difficult. Limited vocabulary, words often incorrect or incorrectly used. Numerous errors, spell check not used.

0 Pts

Poor

Not evident

4 pts

This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeClarity of Discussion

5 to >3.0 Pts

Good Response

Writing communicates meaning clearly and achieves purpose of the task. Reader has no difficulties following line of argument and discussion.

3 to >1.0 Pts

Satisfactory response

Writing generally communicates effectively but logic and meaning not always clear. Reader sometimes is unsure purpose of discussion.

1 to >0.0 Pts

Unsatisfactory response

Logic and meaning lack coherence, reader is often confused.

0 Pts

Poor

Not evident

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeReferencing

5 to >4.0 Pts

Excellent

A great reference list referenced correctly and formatted correctly according to prescribed style.

4 to >2.5 Pts

Good

Information is cited correctly using the RMIT Harvard referencing style.

2.5 to >1.0 Pts

Satisfactory

Information is cited but referencing is inconsistent and there are formatting errors.

1 to >0 Pts

Zero

Referencing is inconsistent and there are formatting errors. There are orphaned references within the body of the paper.

5 pts

Total points: 30

 

You are required to undertaken secondary background research to better understand the nature of the Design Challenge. You are not making recommendations you are trying to better understand the nature of the problem

APA

 

Click here for further assistance on this assignment

The post You are required to undertaken secondary background research to better understand the nature of the Design Challenge. You are not making recommendations you are trying to better understand the nature of the problem appeared first on Apax Researchers.

Reference no: EM132069492