Faculty of Business and Law
Assignment Brief 2023/24
Unit Title: Enterprise Systems
Unit Code: Z7V0041 Core: Level: 7
Assignment Identifier: 1CWK100 Report
Unit Leader: Dr Sofiane Tebboune
Contact Details: s.tebboune@mmu.ac.uk;Tel. 0161 247 6692
Submission Date: See Moodle Feedback Return Date: See Moodle
Submission Instructions: Submit through submission link on the Moodle channel no later than 21.00 on day of submission.
Feedback Return Information: Written feedback distributed to each individual student on Moodle.
Assignment Task and Word Count:
Overview
It is common for individuals starting a research career to write a conference paper. These are sometimes less than 3,000 words (journal articles are often twice this length).
Content
The task is to write a conference style paper in the general area of Enterprise Systems (ES). The paper could, for example, be in one of the following areas:-
• The application of ES in a particular sector (e.g., healthcare, retail, finance, automotive etc).
• The application of ES in a particular type of organisation (e.g., large organisations, Small and Mediumsized Enterprises (SMEs), public/government, etc).
• The application of ES in particular countries or groups of countries (e.g., developing countries or the BRIC nations etc.).
• How ideas from the domain of information systems and information technology influence the application of ES systems (e.g., the use of cloud-based systems).
The paper must conform to the style specified for the ICMR Conference (with a few exceptions as will be described later). Details of this conference style are presented in the Assignment Details and Instructions section below, but a key requirement is that the word length must be no more than 3,000 words.
Unit Learning Outcomes Assessed
1. Critically appraise how information systems in the broadest sense can be applied in a supply-chain situation.
2. Plan and evaluate how an Enterprise System can be used a conceptual level in a particular situation.
Early Career/ World Class Professional Skills (PLOs) being assessed or developed/assessed.
As a matter of course, this assignment will help further develop your information gathering capabilities, critical analysis and thinking skills as well as enhancing your written communication skills essential for employability and life-long learning. In the context of this unit, this assignment will increase your knowledge of Enterprise Systems, which are now widely employed in both the private and public sector. In addition, a specific PLO is assessed in this unit.
AOL Programme learning outcomes Assessed
1. PLO2: Our graduates will be effective communicators using a range of media.
Assignment Details and Instructions
In broad terms, the paper should adopt the ICMR format:
• Fonts: Main title, Ariel 20 pt bold, Headings, Ariel 14 pt bold Sub Headings, Ariel 11 pt bold, Main text, Ariel 11 pt.
• Length: 3,000 words (this is typically longer than the real-world conference, which is subject to a maximum number of pages).
• Diagrams/Tables: Maximum of three.
• Referencing: There is a difference with the ICMR format in this case; the Harvard style should be used as this is the MMUBS standard.
Provided diagrams/tables do not attempt to artificially circumvent the 3,000 word limit (e.g., by simply labelling a block of text as a figure), they are not included in the count. Any material that goes beyond this point, however, will not be considered during the marking process.
Typically, real-world ICMR conference papers would be based on the literature (i.e., secondary data), but occasionally some primary data is collected. In this assignment, however, primary data should not be collected to support your submission. The reason is that all research data collected at MMU needs to be supported by an EthOS application (the nature of an EthOS application will become apparent during the dissertation phase of your programme) It is, however, acceptable to briefly mention your own past experiences if these are relevant to the paper.
Late submissions & Assessment Mitigations:
Please refer to this link which will take you to MMU Student Life Assessment & Results guidance. Here you will find information for MMU’s assessment mitigations process. Further guidance can be found in this video link for step-by-step instructions on how to apply for your extension via Moodle.
Please note: If you think you are unable to submit on time due to a health or some other unforeseen issue you must request this via your unit Moodle page, referring to the guidance in the links provided above.
Academic Integrity, Academic Misconduct and Plagiarism
Academic Integrity is about engaging in good academic practice. It means being honest and transparent, and demonstrating rigour and accuracy in your work. This can include the proper citation and referencing of the sources of your ideas and information, ensuring that you are using appropriate research methods, or checking that your work is free of errors.
Additional information, video tutorials and guides to support good academic practice and maintain Academic Integrity in your assignments can be found on the Academic Integrity area of the Academic and Study Skills page on Moodle.
Academic Misconduct is any action that could give you an unfair advantage in coursework, exams, or any other assessed work, which could lead to undermining the academic standards of the University. This includes practices such as plagiarism, self-plagiarism, collusion, contract cheating or falsification of data. Full details of the Manchester Metropolitan University guidelines for Academic Misconduct and definitions of terms can be found here.
Use of AI technology for your assessment task(s)
As this is a very new area, there are several questions which we don’t have answers to. These include the balance of your text and AI generated text for it to be considered your own work and what form the acknowledgement should take. The important thing is to consider these things and make a judgement based on your context.
OpenAI has a content policy that must be followed when using their tools. It states, ‘Don’t mislead your audience about AI involvement’, so if you use ChatGPT and don’t acknowledge it, you are not abiding by their terms of use.
Referencing
Please ensure to reference all work using the Harvard Referencing System (H.R.S). If you are unsure about using the H.R.S., details can be located at the Library or via Moodle. Assignments that fail to use the H.R.S. will be penalised.
Please refer to the university’s library for more details on H.R.S.
(https://www.mmu.ac.uk/library/referencing-and-study-support/referencing).
Submission Instructions
Upload your conference paper on Moodle. The document must be in the doc or docx file format.
Resources
• Lectures and tutorials materials (see Moodle page).
• Suggested reading list.
Feedback and Support
You will be given written feedback on your submitted work. The provided feedback will cover the strengths and weaknesses of the paper, and will provide guidelines on how to improve the work.
Students will be given various opportunities to discuss their work prior to the submission deadline, and will receive verbal or written summative feedback.
Marking Criteria:
Your submission will be marked using the stepped marking scheme. Your grade will show which marking band your work is in, and whether you are at the top, middle, or bottom of the band. Stepped marking is used to simplify the marking process for staff and make it clearer to students in which band their work sits.
Mark UG
Classification
95-100% Outstanding
90% Very High First
85% High first
80% Mid First
75% Low First
72% Marginal First
68% High 2:1
65% Mid 2:1
62% Low 2:1
58% High 2:2
55% Mid 2:2
52% Low 2:2
48% High third
45% Mid third
42% Low third
38% Marginal Fail
35%
32%
28% Clear fail
25%
22%
18% Poor Fail
15%
12%
8%
5%
2%
0% Non Submission
Assessment Marking Criteria Rubric
Assessment
descriptor
0-19 20-29% 30-39% 40-49% 50-59% 60-69% 70% -85% 86%-100%
Synthesis of the evidence collected
No evidence of anything beyond a token engagement with the literature. Extremely limited review of the relevant literature. Limited and/or superficial review of the relevant literature. Some relevant literature sources have been consulted, but these are not used effectively to form coherent arguments. A more than adequate range of relevant literature (that includes journal articles). The literature presented is synthesised thoughtfully to arrive at the conclusions. A wide range of literature (that includes a substantial number of journal articles). There is a rigorous, thorough and strongly analytical synthesis of the literature. As 60-69%, but rich in critical analysis. Some interesting, unexpected and/or original points are made. As 70%-85%, but
paper is insightful. Suitable for publication in a real-world conference
Presentation of the material.
AOL PLO
2.1.1
The material presented is unintelligible. Largely Incoherent. No attempt to present the paper in the appropriate format.
Chaotic structure. A significant proportion of the paper is incoherent though some parts can be understood. A very limited attempt to comply with the conference format specified. Unhelpful structure. Satisfactory for the most part, but still with some parts of the paper that are hard to follow or are unintelligible. There is some attempt to comply with the specified conference format. Structure does support the arguments presented, but only to a limited extent. The vast majority of the paper is clear and coherent. The paper broadly complies with the specified conference format. The structure does allow conclusions to be drawn from the arguments presented. The material presented is fluent and precise throughout. The paper complies almost fully with the specified format. The structure allows conclusions to be drawn naturally from the arguments presented, aided the follow of the paper. As 60-69%, but the material is very easy to follow and engaging. The paper complies fully with the specified format. Presentation is economical so that a significant amount of content can be included within the limits of the word count. As 70%-85%, but presentation style is authoritative. Suitable for publication in a real-world conference
Referencing
and Citation
AOL PLO
2.1.2
No referencing apparent There is a token attempt at referencing (e.g., by quoting generic
sources such as
“M_M_U_
_L_i_b_r_a_r_y_” _o_r_
_“W_i_k_i_p_e_d_i_a_”)_,_ Some indication of the sources used, but presentation is chaotic and there is no attempt to Sources are identified, but there are still inconsistencies in format. Very limited attempt Some attempt at using the Harvard style, but there are a very large number of errors (e.g., citations without a Good use of the Harvard style. There are still some errors. As 60-69%, but there are still a small number of errors. As 70-85%, but no errors can be detected.
_b_u_t_ _i_t_ _is impossible to determine what material has been used to support the assignment in any way. use in-text citations. to use in-text citations. reference or viceversa, inconsistent formatting of references).
Please Note: in line with faculty guidelines, stepped marking will be employed (i.e., only the trailing digits 2, 5 and 8 will be used).