Recent Question/Assignment

Subject Title Capstone
Subject Code BUS301A
Assessment Title Draft Proposal
Graduate Capabilities 5. Skilled Collaboration
6. Agile Leadership
7. Independent Self-Management
Learning Outcome/s a) Evaluate theoretical concepts/constructs to develop a project plan to address issues part of UN Sustainable Development Goals b) Appraise the feasibility of a sustainable initiative
c) Synthesise your skills and knowledge working collaboratively in an interdisciplinary project
Assessment type (group or individual) Group
Weighting % 30%
Word count 3,000 words (+/- 10%)
Due day Week 7
Submission type Submit into Moodle, with Peer Evaluation ?
Format/layout of assessment Report:
ICMS Cover Page
Proposal Table of Contents
Introduction (approx. 200 words)
• A summary of what motivated the purpose of the project
• A brief summary of the problem
• A brief summary of the solution to the problem
• Lay-out the format for the rest of the proposal v
v
v
Problem and Motivation (approx. 500 words)
• How did this problem come about?
What is the history behind the problem?
• What is the significance of the problem?
• Which UNSD goals does your project address
• What is the motivation for the project (consider both personal and professional relevance)
Goals and Objectives (approx. 200 words)
• Articulate the overall goals of the project
• Link objectives to the goals (SMART)
Problem Solution/Project Details (approx..
1,300 words)
(Remember : Feasibility and Practicality is paramount)
• This is where you need to explain YOUR group’s solution to the problem.
• A detailed plan is required about each and every stage of the project/problem solution (include a timeline)
• Try and justify your solution by researching other (similar) initiatives that have been successful.
• Where there are differences with other projects, justify why your project is different, and how you believe your groups ideas will lead to successful
implementation
Identification of Stakeholders (approx. 200 words)
• Identify all of the stakeholders that will be impacted by the project
Budget & Funding (approx. 200 words)
Issues, Challenges and Contingencies (approx.400 words).
v
v
v
v
v
v
Assessment instructions This is a group assessment. It requires that the group select one of the concepts outlined in Assessment 1 and progress the idea (concept) through a more detailed discussion.
This is a larger, more detailed piece of work that will require the group to propose a project relevant to the group’s area of interest while supporting the United Nations UN Sustainable Development Goals.
The angle the work takes is ethical, social and professional. You are proposing a project that will have an impact on the lives of others or on the professionalism or environmental credentials of your chosen industry through the proposed project. Projects can be in hospitality, sports, tourism, marketing, entrepreneurship, sustainability or the actual UN goals directly.
The proposal needs to address the elements listed above and be specific to the project you wish to work on. The assessment will challenge your ability to collaborate, negotiate tasks and deal with contingencies while maintaining a positive, friendly and professional approach with your group members and with stakeholders in this assessment. This assignment will also form the basis of the final assessment (report and presentation), in which you will defend your proposal and its underlying project to the live class audience and a committee.
The word count does not include cover sheet or table of contents.
Readings for the assessment
This resource can be found online through any browser
List or links to relevant readings:
United Nations: UN Sustainable Development Goals
https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-developmentgoals/
Grading Criteria / Rubric The marking rubric for this assessment is shown below.
Assessment 2 Draft Proposal – Marking Rubric
Criteria HD (85-100) D (75-84) CR
(65-74) PASS (50-64) FAIL (0-49)
Criteria 1
(Weighting 20%) Project proposal and relevance Clear, well-articulated and realistic project that is relevant and innovative. It encapsulates the ICMS ethos and the student’s own social responsibility philosophy Project clearly identified with some details that are relevant to the course, the student’s career and the ICMS ethos A project is identified, but there is a lack of cohesion with regard to
its social, ethical or environmental impact and the ICMS ethos, though it appears to be relevant to the student’s career direction The identified project is somewhat limited in its breadth or potential impact and incorporates very limited ethical or
professional considerations The selected project is not relevant to the ethos of ICMS nor to the broader social, environmental and ethical drivers resulting from the course. It is superficially presented with minimal or no links to real-world context
Criteria 2
(Weighting 20 %)
Project implementation plan A project implementation plan exists that is well thought-out, easy to follow and is practical. The plan uses professional planning tools and aligns with the timelines set-out by the group The plan incorporates some aspects of professional planning and is in some places relevant and practical, but lacks a
comprehensive alignment with the realities of the problem being addressed Limited use of project
planning and
implementation
techniques is used. The plan does not contain all the elements required to
assess its
implementation potential A superficial plan is presented with little connection to the resources, timelines or realties of the problem being addressed. It does not employ professional planning approaches and lacks clarity Limited information is provided as the basis for a plan with limited prospects to be evaluated for practical application. There is very limited or no use of professional planning tool and techniques and no apparent in-depth analysis of what is required to achieve the plan’s goals
Criteria 3
(Weighting 20 %) Connection to and impact of the project on the UN
Sustainable
Development
Goals There exists a direct and valid connection between the goals of the project and the UN Sustainable Development Goals exemplified through the targets set by the project A link between the project and the Un Sustainable Development Goals exists, but the targets of the project only partially align to those goals. There is no clarity on how the targets will be met A minor link exists between the project and
the UN Sustainable development goals. The link appears to be superficial and lacks the depth that provides readers with confidence in the project Very limited or no link exists between the project and the UN
Sustainable
Development Goals. The link is not supported by rational targets that are resourced and timed. There is potential for mis-interpretation of the project There is no link between the targets of the project and the UN Sustainable Development Goals. The project stands isolated from the ethical, social or environmental imperatives that the UN goals set. The project is superficial in its targets
Criteria 4?
(Weighting 20%) Proposal rationale and argument The proposal is professional and comprehensive in its
articulation of the problem being addressed. It provides clear, meaningful and relevant reasons for the importance of the project and provides the reader with context Arguments supporting the validity of the proposal exist, though some may not be practical or achievable. Some context is provided, but the reader is left to complete the picture through other sources, not from the proposal itself Inconsistent or weak arguments for the rationale for the proposal are used. They do not provide a comprehensive or accurate picture of the state of play regarding the problem being addressed and there is limited or no context Disparate, disconnected statements are made in support of the proposal and its underlying
project, but there is
limited or no evidence that research and consideration have been
given to this rationale,
which may be impractical or irrelevant There is no rationale or argumentation in support of the proposal. The reason for the project and its impact are absent and there is no context for the reader to assess the credibility of the proposal
Criteria 5
(Weighting 20%) Language, format and correctness of spelling and grammar Few, if any errors of punctuation, spelling and format Some typical errors are evident, but overall the writing is correct Several spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors exist in the writing which lacks consistently correct formatting Many spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors exist in the writing. Incorrect
formatting and inconsistent treatment of word usage Very high levels of spelling, grammatical and punctuation errors exist in the writing. Very low level of professional styling in presenting the work and significant inconsistency in the use of words