This assignment constitutes 70% of the assessment for this module.
This is an individual assessed assignment. PLAGIARISM WILL BE PENALISED VIA THE UNIVERSITY’S DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURE.
Coursework Hand-In Deadline: 12 Noon 3rd January 2022
The coursework must be electronically submitted by the above deadline. Prior to submission you must also submit your assignment on Turnitin (instructions available on Moodle). Your SUBMISSION must include a Coursework Front sheet for each task, attached.
References
All sources should be cited and referenced using the Harvard Referencing system. The principles of the Harvard Referencing system are detailed in the leaflets available in the library. You should NOT use the general Internet references e.g. www.google.com, www.yahoo.com and Wikipedia etc. All references should be from the credible sources e.g. books, articles, journals, magazines etc.
Feedback
Feedback on performance, problems, and presentations will take place in the seminar sessions. It is not practice to read drafts of work in progress, however you may discuss any relevant issues in the seminar slots. Your coursework will be marked and assessed as detailed on pages 7 to 8 of this brief.
Presentation
1. Ensure that there is a good usage of grammar and correct spelling throughout.
2. Referencing is presented in Harvard style.
3. Ensure the coursework is well structured and neatly presented.
4. Attach cover sheet to the front of your submission.
Word Limit: Task One: 2000 words + 10%
Extensions: Any claim for extenuating circumstances must be made through the official University channel. Read: https://icity.bcu.ac.uk/Student-Services/Complaints-and-Appeals for guidance.
Coursework Case Study
TCU is an English university which has 26,000 students. The body of students is made up of 20,000 full time students and 6,000 part time students. There are 22,000 home students and 4,000 overseas students. The university runs a mixture of undergraduate, post graduate and professional courses.
TCU employs 3,000 staff.
TCU is ranked 52nd out of 114 universities in the overall ranking of universities, it is ranked 45th out of 114 universities for research output and 10th out of 114 universities in the Green table.
TCU has an aging portfolio of Information Systems with minimal integration between the systems. The result of this is lack of integration of data and high maintenance costs.
In 2015 TCU made the decision to replace the existing Finance/Accounting and HR systems with an Enterprise Resource Planning system and chose the Oracle ERP system. The ‘big bang’ implementation date was planned for 2017. The ERP implementation project suffered from the common problems of ERP implementations, namely:
- Common data definition
- Data migration
- Change of business processes
- Limited expertise
- Contention for knowledgeable staff resources
- Not enough staff
The impact of these problems was that implementation was delayed until August 2018 and it was implemented in stage rather than ‘big bang’. The result was that there were significant overrun costs, problems with the changeover of processes which meant TCU did not pay invoices for a significant period and was ‘blacklisted’ by some suppliers.
In addition to the above Finance/Accounting and HR systems, TCU has the following key systems:
Student Record Systems (SRS) – This system holds the records for student, covering personal details, course and module details, payment status, results.
Attendance Monitoring System – This system records the attendance of students which is crucial for students who are in the country on a visa. This is a poorly designed system which does not process data correctly which has resulted in incomplete or incorrect information. The information output of the system cannot be replied upon.
Timetabling System – Although it is titled a Timetabling system it is, in effect, a room booking system. It does not have the functionality to see if staff or students have conflicted bookings, it does not allow the booking of student groups to enable efficient timetabling of students sessions.
Applications System – The system to process applications is poorly designed, applications are not allocated to the correct admissions tutor, admissions can send questions to the admissions tutor but there is functionality for a response. Often when applications are reassigned the system does not reassign them.
Moodle – This is TCU’s Virtual Learning Environment
There is limited integration between SRS and Moodle and the interface between SRS and the Attendance monitoring system provides incorrect data.
TCU has recognised the above issues and they impact operational running and have decided to investigate the implementation of an ERP Education Suite. An ERP Education Suite provides all the functionality that will be required by a Higher Education Institute.
REQUIREMENT
The requirement is to produce a Systemic Analysis using Soft Systems Methodology techniques of TCU proposal to implement an ERP Education Suite.
Task 1 – 10 marks
Define a system ‘purpose’ for the proposed system.
Evaluate your system purpose
Definition – 5 marks
Evaluation – 5 marks
Task 2 – 20 marks
Identify the system boundary, then identify the elements within the boundary and the elements outside the boundary. Identify any sub systems.
Evaluate your analysis.
Boundary identification – 5 marks
Inside elements – 5 marks
Outside elements – 5 marks
Evaluation – 5 marks
Task 3 – 10 marks
Produce a CATWOE and a Root Definition.
CATWOE – 5 marks
Root Definition – 5 marks
Task 4 – 20 marks-
Identify the stakeholders and stakeholder groups involved in the system. Identify the stakeholders perspective.
Evaluate your analysis.
Stakeholder identification – 7 marks
Stakeholder perspective – 8 marks
Evaluation – 5 marks
Task 5 – 25 marks
Identify the inputs/transformation/outputs/feedback for the system.
Evaluate your analysis.
Inputs – 5 marks
Transformation – 5 marks
Outputs – 5 marks
Feedback – 5 marks
Evaluation 5 marks
Task XXXXXXXXXXmarks
Reflect on the above process you have undertaken.
Reflections on Systemic Analysis and SSM – 10 marks
Reflections on the system – 5 marks
Please note:
Reference from academic and commercial sources to support your argument throughout, will enhance the grade awarded. Failure to do so, along with poor structuring and sentence construction within your report will constrain the grade awarded. For academic support with your referencing and writing please visit the Centre for Academic Success home page.
Marking Criteria
Postgraduate bands
|
| 0 – 39% Fail | 40 – 49% Fail | 50 – 59% Pass | 60 – 69% Strong Pass (merit) | 70 – 79% Very Strong Pass (distinction) | 80 – 100% Exceptionally Strong Pass (distinction) |
| Criterion 1 Mark: | Differentiate and evaluate different approaches to analyse a system. |
| Differentiation and evaluation is weak and superficial and does not identify the different approaches to analyse a system. | Differentiation and evaluation is limited and does not identify all of the key internal capabilities and key elements of the environment. | The key elements of the different approaches have been identified but the evaluation of them is limited | The key elements of the have been identified and an effective evaluation of them has been produced | The key elements of the different approaches have been identified and an effective evaluation which integrates them has been produced | The key elements of the different approaches have been identified and an effective critical evaluation which integrates them has been produced. |
| Criterion 2 Mark: | Create and evaluate a system using a Systemic Approach. |
| The system is weak and superficial and does not identify the key required elements of the company | The system is limited and does not identify all the key required elements of the company | The system is adequate with the required elements of the company have been identified but the evaluation is limited | The system is effective with the required elements of the company have been identified and an effective evaluation has been produced | The system is well integrated with the required elements of the company have been identified and an effective evaluation of the system has been produced | The system is well integrated with the required elements of the company have been identified. The analysis has been critically evaluated |
| Criterion 3 Mark: | Evaluate an Accounting Information System using the Systemic and Soft Systems Approaches. |
| Evaluation is weak and superficial. The key Accounting elements have not been identified | Evaluation is limited, only limited Accounting elements have been identified. | The evaluation is adequate and the key Accounting elements have been identified | The evaluation is effective and the key Accounting elements have been identified | The evaluation is effective and the key Accounting elements have been identified and integrated together. | The key Accounting elements have been identified and integrated together. A critical evaluation has been produced. |
| Criterion 4 Mark: | Evaluate an Accounting Information System using the Systemic and Soft Systems Approaches. |
| Evaluation is weak and superficial. The key Accounting elements have not been identified | Evaluation is limited, only limited Accounting elements have been identified. | The evaluation is adequate and the key Accounting elements have been identified | The evaluation is effective and the key Accounting elements have been identified | The evaluation is effective and the key Accounting elements have been identified and integrated together. | The key Accounting elements have been identified and integrated together. A critical evaluation has been produced. |