Answer & Explanation:I need only 1 case study not 2 and only 1200 words.. will send the example
assessment_1_guidelines__2_.pdf
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Deakin University, Faculty of Business and Law
MPM712 Managing Innovation – Trimester 2, 2016
Assessment Overview
Assessment Submission Details & Weighting
This is a team assessment that will contribute 50% to your overall mark in the subject.
Due Date:
Due by 23:59 on Sunday 14 August. Note: as there is no IT support offered overnight if you
have any trouble with submitting your assignment, just email me to let me know and then
submit it first thing the next morning (once the IT support are available to assist you). There
will be no late submission penalty if this situation occurs.
Submission:
• Submit a soft copy via CloudDeakin (link on unit site under Assessment). Please ensure
you save a copy of your document before submitting it. Also clearly indicate all the team
members on the title page.
Overall Word Length:
•
4000 words (+/- 10%) excluding title page, reference list and appendices.
Assessment Weighting:
• Case Study 1:
o Context (5%)
o Assessment of the Innovation (10%)
o Challenges to the innovation (5%)
o Grammar, spelling, presentation (5%)
• Case Study 2:
o Context (5%)
o Assessment of the Innovation (10%)
o Challenges to the innovation (5%)
o Grammar, spelling, presentation (5%)
Assessment Objectives
The purpose of this assessment is to provide students with the opportunity to study those
organisations which are innovating successfully in order to understand what sets them
apart. As part of the group process it is expected that you will gather as much information
about the organization and debate and discuss what the aspects of the organization are that
lead to innovative outcomes. Use the models discussed in the first few weeks of the
semester as a guideline for your discussions to ensure that you are tying the theory back to
what is unfolding in reality.
Key learning outcomes of the task are:
• Demonstrate an understanding of the processes of innovation management
• Review alignment between processes and organisational capabilities and critically
appraise an organisations capacity to successfully manage innovation.
1|Page
Deakin University, Faculty of Business and Law
MPM712 Managing Innovation – Trimester 2, 2016
•
Connect with others and work as part of a team in order to achieve innovative
outcomes.
Assessment Task
Students are required to self-select teams of four to work in. When choosing a team consider
whether you have diversity in your team as, working with a diverse set of individuals is a
key aspect of being able to manage innovation, thus this assessment provides the
opportunity to develop these skills.
Teams need to select two organisations which they believe are innovative and then provide
a case study for each of these organisations. The purpose of the case studies is to provide
an insight into the organisations, the context they exist within and what in particular allows
this company to be innovative. The case study needs to be written and presented in a way
which would be appropriate for other students undertaking a similar course, thus it needs
to be informative and also to link theory to what unfolds in practice.
Teams can decide their own criteria for the format of the report but the key aspects that you
need to cover are:
•
•
•
2|Page
The context
The organizations innovation
Any potential threats to the innovation
Deakin University, Faculty of Business and Law
MPM712 Managing Innovation – Trimester 2, 2016
Marking Criteria for the Assessment
CRITERIA
CASE STUDY 1:
DESCRIPTION OF
CONTEXT
5%
CASE STUDY 1:
ORGANISATION’S
INNOVATION
CAPACITY
10%
3|Page
Yet to achieve minimum
standard
Meets standard
Fail (N) 0 – 49
Pass (P) 50 – 59
Credit (C) 60 – 69
Distinction (D) 70 -79
Does not clearly describe
the organisational context.
Some of the content in
this section is not relevant
to the context.
Clearly describes the
organisational context.
The content included in
this section is relevant
for understanding the
context.
Clearly and expertly
describes the
organisational context.
All the relevant
information needed to
understand the context
is included.
Consistently, clearly
and expertly describes
the organisational
context. There is
sufficient depth in this
section to demonstrate
a specialist
understanding of the
context.
Consistently, clearly,
succinctly and expertly
describes the
organisational context.
The information has
sufficient breadth and
depth to demonstrate a
expert and specialist
understanding of the
context
Unable/rarely able to
organise and synthesise
complex evidence and
identify subtle insights
into innovation. Always
fail to reflect on theory,
professional practice or
scholarship.
Organises and
synthesises complex
evidence to reveal
some subtle insights
into innovation.
Reflects on theory,
professional practice
and/or scholarship in
analysing innovation
Organises and
synthesises complex
evidence to reveal
obvious subtle insights,
with regard to
innovation. Reflects on
advanced theory,
professional practice
and/or scholarship and
critically analyses and
theorises about
developments that
contribute to
Organises and
synthesises evidence to
reveal insight into
innovation. Reflects
deeply on advanced
theory, professional
practice and/or
scholarship. Critically
analyses and theorises,
synthesising a range of
views and theories,
about developments
that contribute to
professional practice or
Organises and
synthesises evidence to
reveal insightful
patterns with regard to
innovation. Reflects
deeply on advanced
theory, professional
practice and/or
scholarship. Critically
analyses and theorises,
synthesising a wide
range of views and
theories, about
developments that
Exceeds standard
High Distinction (HD)
80 -100
Deakin University, Faculty of Business and Law
MPM712 Managing Innovation – Trimester 2, 2016
CRITERIA
CASE STUDY 1:
CHALLENGES TO
INNOVATION
5%
CASE STUDY 1:
PRESENTATION*
5%
4|Page
Yet to achieve minimum
standard
Meets standard
Fail (N) 0 – 49
Pass (P) 50 – 59
Exceeds standard
Credit (C) 60 – 69
Distinction (D) 70 -79
professional practice or
scholarship.
scholarship.
Authoritatively
interprets and justifies
propositions and
conclusions with regard
to innovation.
High Distinction (HD)
80 -100
contribute to
professional practice or
scholarship.
Authoritatively and
succinctly interprets
and justifies theoretical
propositions, and
conclusions with regard
to innovation.
Demonstrates no/limited
ability to independently
construct a clear and
succinct statement about a
complex challenges from
an innovation perspective
including identifying
relevant contextual
factors.
Demonstrates
satisfactory ability to
independently and
expertly construct a
clear and succinct
statement about a
complex challenges to
innovation with
evidence of somewhat
relevant contextual
factors.
Demonstrates a good
ability to independently
and expertly construct
a clear and succinct
statement about a
complex with regard to
innovation with
evidence of reasonably
relevant contextual
factors.
Demonstrates a very
good ability to
independently and
expertly construct a
clear, succinct and
insightful statement
about a complex
challenges with regard
to innovation with
evidence of relevant
contextual factors.
Demonstrates
exceedingly high
ability to independently
and expertly construct
a clear, succinct and
insightful statement
about a complex with
regard to innovation
with evidence of all
relevant contextual
factors.
Always or mostly uses
inappropriate and/or
irrelevant content to
develop and explore basic
ideas and presents an
unacceptable exposition
of complex knowledge
and ideas.
Moderately uses
appropriate, relevant,
and compelling content
to illustrate mastery of
the subject or topic and
presents a clear,
coherent, independent
and professional
exposition of complex
knowledge and ideas
Mostly uses
appropriate, relevant,
and compelling content
to illustrate mastery of
the subject or topic and
presents a clear,
coherent, independent
and professional
exposition of complex
knowledge and ideas
Consistently uses
appropriate, relevant,
and compelling content
to illustrate a mastery
of the subject or topic
and generates original
knowledge and
understanding, making
a substantial
contribution to a
Consistently and
effectively uses
appropriate, relevant,
and compelling content
to illustrate a mastery
of the subject or topic
and generates original
knowledge and
understanding, making
a very substantial
contribution to a
Deakin University, Faculty of Business and Law
MPM712 Managing Innovation – Trimester 2, 2016
CRITERIA
Yet to achieve minimum
standard
Meets standard
Fail (N) 0 – 49
Pass (P) 50 – 59
Exceeds standard
Credit (C) 60 – 69
Distinction (D) 70 -79
discipline or area of
professional practice.
CASE STUDY 2:
DESCRIPTION OF
CONTEXT
5%
CASE STUDY 2:
ORGANISATION’S
INNOVATION
CAPACITY
10%
5|Page
High Distinction (HD)
80 -100
discipline or area of
professional practice.
Does not clearly describe
the organisational context.
Some of the content in
this section is not relevant
to the context.
Clearly describes the
organisational context.
The content included in
this section is relevant
for understanding the
context.
Clearly and expertly
describes the
organisational context.
All the relevant
information needed to
understand the context
is included.
Consistently, clearly
and expertly describes
the organisational
context. There is
sufficient depth in this
section to demonstrate
a specialist
understanding of the
context.
Consistently, clearly,
succinctly and expertly
describes the
organisational context.
The information has
sufficient breadth and
depth to demonstrate a
expert and specialist
understanding of the
context
Unable/rarely able to
organise and synthesise
complex evidence and
identify subtle insights
into innovation. Always
fail to reflect on theory,
professional practice or
scholarship.
Organises and
synthesises complex
evidence to reveal
some subtle insights
into innovation.
Reflects on theory,
professional practice
and/or scholarship in
analysing innovation
Organises and
synthesises complex
evidence to reveal
obvious subtle insights,
with regard to
innovation. Reflects on
advanced theory,
professional practice
and/or scholarship and
critically analyses and
theorises about
developments that
contribute to
professional practice or
scholarship.
Organises and
synthesises evidence to
reveal insight into
innovation. Reflects
deeply on advanced
theory, professional
practice and/or
scholarship. Critically
analyses and theorises,
synthesising a range of
views and theories,
about developments
that contribute to
professional practice or
scholarship.
Authoritatively
interprets and justifies
propositions and
Organises and
synthesises evidence to
reveal insightful
patterns with regard to
innovation. Reflects
deeply on advanced
theory, professional
practice and/or
scholarship. Critically
analyses and theorises,
synthesising a wide
range of views and
theories, about
developments that
contribute to
professional practice or
scholarship.
Authoritatively and
Deakin University, Faculty of Business and Law
MPM712 Managing Innovation – Trimester 2, 2016
CRITERIA
Yet to achieve minimum
standard
Meets standard
Fail (N) 0 – 49
Pass (P) 50 – 59
Exceeds standard
Credit (C) 60 – 69
Distinction (D) 70 -79
conclusions with regard
to innovation.
CASE STUDY 2:
CHALLENGES TO
INNOVATION
5%
CASE STUDY 2:
PRESENTATION*
5%
Demonstrates no/limited
ability to independently
construct a clear and
succinct statement about a
complex challenges from
an innovation perspective
including identifying
relevant contextual
factors.
Always or mostly uses
inappropriate and/or
irrelevant content to
develop and explore basic
ideas and presents an
unacceptable exposition
of complex knowledge
and ideas.
Demonstrates
satisfactory ability to
independently and
expertly construct a
clear and succinct
statement about a
complex challenges to
innovation with
evidence of somewhat
relevant contextual
factors.
Moderately uses
appropriate, relevant,
and compelling content
to illustrate mastery of
the subject or topic and
presents a clear,
coherent, independent
and professional
exposition of complex
knowledge and ideas
Demonstrates a good
ability to independently
and expertly construct
a clear and succinct
statement about a
complex with regard to
innovation with
evidence of reasonably
relevant contextual
factors.
Demonstrates a very
good ability to
independently and
expertly construct a
clear, succinct and
insightful statement
about a complex
challenges with regard
to innovation with
evidence of relevant
contextual factors.
Mostly uses
appropriate, relevant,
and compelling content
to illustrate mastery of
the subject or topic and
presents a clear,
coherent, independent
and professional
exposition of complex
knowledge and ideas
Consistently uses
appropriate, relevant,
and compelling content
to illustrate a mastery
of the subject or topic
and generates original
knowledge and
understanding, making
a substantial
contribution to a
discipline or area of
professional practice.
*Marks will be deducted in this section for being over the word limit
6|Page
High Distinction (HD)
80 -100
succinctly interprets
and justifies theoretical
propositions, and
conclusions with regard
to innovation.
Demonstrates
exceedingly high
ability to independently
and expertly construct
a clear, succinct and
insightful statement
about a complex with
regard to innovation
with evidence of all
relevant contextual
factors.
Consistently and
effectively uses
appropriate, relevant,
and compelling content
to illustrate a mastery
of the subject or topic
and generates original
knowledge and
understanding, making
a very substantial
contribution to a
discipline or area of
professional practice.
…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
Order a plagiarism free paper now. We do not use AI. Use the code SAVE15 to get a 15% Discount
Looking for help with your ASSIGNMENT? Our paper writing service can help you achieve higher grades and meet your deadlines.
Why order from us
We offer plagiarism-free content
We don’t use AI
Confidentiality is guaranteed
We guarantee A+ quality
We offer unlimited revisions