Systems Thinking

Systems Thinking

by B3ln4iNmum

MGT603_ Assessment 1_ Part A and Part B Page 1 of 7

ASSESSMENT 1 BRIEF
Subject Code and Title MGT603 Systems Thinking
Assessment Part A: Proposal Individual (500 Words)
Part B: Critique (500 Words)
Individual/Group Individual
Length Part A: One (1) Original Post (maximum 500 words)
Part B: Two (2) Critiques, Each critique maximum 250 words
Learning Outcomes The Subject Learning Outcomes demonstrated by successful completion
of the task below include:
a) Critically evaluate the paradigms of Systems
Thinking conceptualization and its application to
contemporary business issues
Submission For regular class (12 Weeks Duration):
Part A: By 11:55 pm AEST/AEDT Sunday of Module 2.2 (week 4)
Part B: By 11:55 pm AEST/AEDT Sunday of Module 3.1 (week 5)
For intensive class (6 Weeks Duration):
Part A: By 11:55 pm AEST/AEDT Sunday of Module 2.2 (week 2)
Part B: By 11:55 pm AEST/AEDT Sunday of Module 3.1 (week 3)
Weighting Part A: 20%
Part B: 20%
Total Marks Part A: 20 marks
Part B: 20 marks

AssignmentTutorOnline

Assessment Task and Context
Systems thinking requires us to take a holistic view of the world we live in and the organisations we
work with. This assessment has been prescribed to appraise students’ ability to think holistically and
generate discussion around recognising and understanding organisational operations using a
Systems Thinking lens. The assessment will broaden students’ knowledge of and appreciation for
using a different approach to look for and solve problems faced by managers in contemporary
organisations.
This assessment has been designed to:
Appraise your ability to academically research and evaluate paradigms of Systems Thinking
conceptualisation and apply to contemporary business issues.
You are expected to utilise the literature provided in Modules 1 to 3.1 in your analysis and
discussion, and are required to apply critical thinking, presenting multi-sided findings.
Successful completion of this assessment will help you to further understand Systems Thinking
in a practical context. It will also help you to maintain currency in the increasingly changing
industry.
There are two (2) parts to MGT603 Assessment 1. For an acceptable result, you will need to
complete both Part A and Part B of MGT603 Assessment 1.
MGT603_ Assessment 1_ Part A and Part B Page 2 of 7
MGT603 Assessment 1 (Part A):
Task Instructions:
1. Please review the MGT603 Assessment 1 (Part A) list of case organisations (found in the
Assessment 1 – Part A Proposal Individual & Part B Critique Individual page on MGT603
Blackboard).
2. From the MGT603 Assessment 1 (Part A) list of case organisations, only choose ONE (1) case
organisation for MGT603 Assessment 1 (Part A).
3. Read and research widely on the selected case organisation and find out how “COVID-19
Pandemic” has created a significant issue/challenge/problem for your selected case
organisation in 2021-2022 and how “Systems Thinking Approach” can assist in making
optimal decisions.
4. You are then required to prepare and post in the Assessment 1 Discussion Forum ONE (1)
original post identifying the intended or unintended consequences on various stakeholders
of your chosen organisation and then recommend/propose alternative policies/procedures
using Systems Thinking approach to help overcome theproblem.
Key points to consider in your MGT603 Assessment 1 (Part A):
The submission must be in WORD document format.
Your proposal should be “holistic”.
Add a title page at the beginning of the assessment document with subject code, subject
name, assessment number, report title, assessment due date, word count (actual),
student name and surname, student ID, Torrens’s email address, learning facilitator name
and surname details.
You must include references to “Systems Thinking Literature”. Please make sure to use at
least three (3) academic-related references (e.g. peer-reviewed journal articles, book
chapters, and conference papers) and at least two (2) other references (e.g. newspaper,
magazines, websites, etc.).
Make sure to consider using Systems Thinking tools such as Rich Picture and CATWOE in
your MGT603 Assessment 1 (Part A).
Make sure to number all sections and sub-sections within your assessment (e.g. 1, 1.1,
etc.).
All inserted Figures and Tables within the assessment require being labelled and
numbered appropriately (e.g. Figure 1: Rich Picture …., Table 1: CATWOE Analysis ….).
They all require being initially stated/introduced and then discussed in-detail and indepth. Please make sure to provide the source/reference for the information expressed
via the Figures and Tables.
Make sure to provide a brief rational of why it is important to use Systems Thinking and
relevant tools and techniques to solve the identified organisational problem to minimize
adverse consequences.
Please make sure to write in the “third person” (e.g. The author, The writer, etc.).
Please ensure your original posts are submitted in the MGT603 Assessment 1 (Part A)
Discussion Forum by the end of Module 2.2.
MGT603_ Assessment 1_ Part A and Part B Page 3 of 7
MGT603 Assessment 1 (Part B):
Task Instructions:
1. Each student is required to critique an original post (Part A) of two (2) peers.
2. Each Critique should be maximum of 250 words. Overall your Assessment 1 (Part B) should
be maximum of 500 words.
3. Your Critique should include commentary on:
Whether the original post is holistic. Please identify missing components, if any, and
provide constructive feedback.
Have all plausible consequences been identified?
Have Systems Thinking tools been used and used properly? Please provide a critique
of these tools and their use in solving the identified problem.
Please make sure to highlight the authors of the chosen posts.
Please ensure to submit Assessment 1 (Part B) in the related Discussion Forum
Thread, by the end of Module 3.1.
Key points to consider in your MGT603 Assessment 1 (Part B):
The submission must be in WORD document format.
Add a title page at the beginning of the assessment document with subject code, subject
name, assessment number, report title, assessment due date, word count (actual),
student name and surname, student ID, Torrens’s email address, learning facilitator name
and surname details.
This assessment is designed to create robust discussion around Systems Thinking with
your peers. Please feel free to post more than what is specified to broaden your
understanding and appreciation of the topic.
While presenting your views, you are required to support claims either with the relevant
experience or with the published literature (e.g. Journal articles, book chapters, relevant
website links, news article, magazines).
The views could be supporting comments and feedback, or they may be a contradiction,
but you need to provide appropriate justification as specified above.
If referring to published literature to support stated views, you are required to cite the
reference(s) and list the reference(s) at the end of your response in the “References”
section. If you can provide appropriate articles to support an opinion, it will be valued
considerably.
Along with actively participating in the discussions, it is equally important to provide
responses, which are relevant and add value to the discussion. The quality of response will
be considered as one of the most important criteria for evaluating students in MGT603
Assessment 1 (Part B).
Referencing
It is essential that students use appropriate APA style for citing and referencing research. Please see
more information on referencing here in the Academic Writing Guide found via the Academic Skills
website.
MGT603_ Assessment 1_ Part A and Part B Page 4 of 7
Submission Instructions
For each assessment (e.g. MGT603 Assessment 1 Part A, MGT603 Assessment 1 Part B), please
submit ONE Microsoft Word document (.doc or.docx) via the MGT603 Assessment 1 Part A and Part
B submission links in the main navigation menu on Blackboard. The Learning Facilitator will provide
feedback via the Grade Centre in the LMS portal. Feedback can be viewed in My Grades.
Academic Integrity
All students are responsible for ensuring that all work submitted is their own and is appropriately
referenced and academically written according to the Academic Writing Guide. Students also need
to have read and be aware of Torrens University Australia Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure
and subsequent penalties for academic misconduct. These are viewable online.
Students also must keep a copy of all submitted material and any assessment drafts.
Special Consideration
To apply for special consideration for a modification to an assessment or exam due to unexpected or
extenuating circumstances, please consult the Assessment Policy for Higher Education Coursework
and ELICOS and, if applicable to your circumstance, submit a completed Application for Assessment
Special Consideration Form to your Learning Facilitator
MGT603_ Assessment 1_ Part A and Part B Page 5 of 7
Assessment Rubric

Assessment
Attributes		 Fail
(Yet to achieve
minimum standard)
0-49%		 Pass
(Functional)
50-64%		 Credit
(Proficient)
65-74%		 Distinction
(Advanced)
75-84%		 High Distinction
(Exceptional)
85-100%
Knowledge
and
understanding
(technical and
theoretical
knowledge)
Understands
theoretical
models and
concepts
Percentage for
this criterion =
25%		 Limited
understanding of
required concepts
and knowledge
Key components of
the assignment are
not addressed.
Stakeholders, goals,
intended and
unintended
consequences of the
policy change are not
addressed. Tools and
techniques of systems
thinking such as Rich
picture, Causal loop
diagrams, etc. are not
identified.		 Knowledge or
understanding of
the field or
discipline.
Resembles a recall
or summary of
key ideas.
Often confuses
assertion of personal
opinion with
information
substantiated by
evidence from the
research/course
materials.
Stakeholders, goals,
intended and
unintended
consequences of the
policy change are
addressed at very
preliminary level.
Tools and techniques
of systems thinking
such as Rich picture,
Causal loop diagrams,		 Thorough knowledge
or understanding of
the field or
discipline/s.
Supports personal
opinion and
information
substantiated by
evidence from the
research/course
materials.
Demonstrates a
capacity to explain
and apply relevant
concepts.
Stakeholders, goals,
intended and
unintended
consequences of the
policy change are
addressed at
appropriate level. Tools
and techniques of
systems thinking such
as Rich picture, Causal		 Highly developed
understanding of
the field or
discipline/s.
Discriminates between
assertion of personal
opinion and
information
substantiated by
robust evidence from
the research/course
materials and extended
reading.
Well demonstrated
capacity to explain and
apply relevant
concepts.
Stakeholders, goals,
intended and unintended
consequences of the
policy change are
addressed
comprehensively. Tools
and techniques of
systems thinking such as
Rich picture, Causal loop		 A sophisticated
understanding of the
field or discipline/s.
Systematically and
critically discriminates
between assertion of
personal opinion and
information
substantiated by robust
evidence from the
research/course
materials and extended
reading.
Mastery of concepts and
application to new
situations/further
learning.
Stakeholders, goals,
intended and
unintended
consequences of the
policy change are
addressed thoroughly.
Tools and techniques of
systems thinking such as
Rich picture, Causal loop

MGT603_ Assessment 1_ Part A and Part B Page 6 of 7

Assessment
Attributes		 Fail
(Yet to achieve
minimum standard)
0-49%		 Pass
(Functional)
50-64%		 Credit
(Proficient)
65-74%		 Distinction
(Advanced)
75-84%		 High Distinction
(Exceptional)
85-100%
etc. are used but at
very superficial level.		 loop diagrams, etc. are
used with clarity.		 diagrams, etc. are used
with high level of
understanding.		 diagrams, etc. are used
demonstrating mastery in
the use of these tools.
Context,
Audience and
Purpose
Percentage for
this criterion =
25%		 Demonstrates no
awareness of context
and/or purpose of the
assignment.		 Demonstrates limited
awareness of context
and/or purpose of the
assignment.		 Demonstrates
consistent awareness
of context and/or
purpose of the
assignment.		 Demonstrates an
advanced and integrated
understanding of context
and/or purpose of the
assignment.		 Consistently demonstrates
a systematic and critical
understanding of context
and purpose of the
assignment.
Analysis and
application
with synthesis
of new
knowledge
Percentage for
this criterion =
25%		 Limited synthesis
and analysis.
Limited application/
Recommendations
based upon analysis.
No critique on the
peers’ posts. Just
summarized the peers’
posts.		 Demonstrated
analysis and
synthesis of new
knowledge with
application.
Shows the
ability to
interpret
relevant
information
and literature.
Critiqued on the
peers’ post however,
there is lack of depth
and insight.		 Well-developed
analysis and
synthesis with
application of
recommendations
linked to
analysis/synthesis.
Critiqued on the peers’
post with appropriate
depth and insight.		 Thoroughly developed
and creative analysis
and synthesis of new
with existing
knowledge.
Application of pretested
models and / or
independently
developed models and
justified
recommendations
linked to
analysis/synthesis.
Critiqued on the peers’
post comprehensively
covering most of the
missing aspect.		 Highly sophisticated and
creative analysis,
synthesis of new with
existing knowledge.
Strong application by way
of pretested models and /
or independently
developed models.
Recommendations are
clearly justified based on
the analysis/synthesis.
Applying knowledge to new
situations/other cases.
Critiqued on the peers’
post comprehensively
covering most of the
missing aspects with

MGT603_ Assessment 1_ Part A and Part B Page 7 of 7

Assessment
Attributes		 Fail
(Yet to achieve
minimum standard)
0-49%		 Pass
(Functional)
50-64%		 Credit
(Proficient)
65-74%		 Distinction
(Advanced)
75-84%		 High Distinction
(Exceptional)
85-100%
creative insights.
Effective
Communication
Percentage for
this criterion =
15%		 Difficult to
understand, no
logical/clear structure,
poor flow of ideas,
argument lacks
supporting evidence.
Audience cannot
follow the line of
reasoning.		 Information,
arguments, and
evidence are
presented in a way
that is not always
clear and logical.
Line of reasoning is
often difficult to
follow.		 Information,
arguments and
evidence are well
presented, mostly
clear flow of ideas
and arguments.
Line of reasoning is
easy to follow.		 Information, arguments
and evidence are very
well presented; the
proposal and critique is
logical, clear and well
supported by evidence.		 Expertly presented; the
proposal and critique is
logical, persuasive, and
well supported by
evidence, demonstrating a
clear flow of ideas and
arguments.
Correct citation
of key resources
and evidence
Percentage for
this criterion =
10%		 Demonstrates
inconsistent use of
good quality, credible
and relevant resources
to support and
develop ideas.		 Demonstrates use of
credible and relevant
resources to support
and develop ideas,
but these are not
always explicit or well
developed.		 Demonstrates use of
high quality, credible
and relevant resources
to support and develop
ideas.		 Demonstrates use of
good quality, credible
and relevant resources to
support and develop
arguments and
statements. Shows
evidence of wide scope
within the organisation
for sourcing evidence.		 Demonstrates use of high
quality, credible and
relevant resources to
support and develop
arguments and position
statements. Shows
evidence of wide scope
within and without the
organisation for sourcing
evidence.

 

The following Subject Learning Outcomes are addressed in this assessment
SLO a) Critically evaluate the paradigms of Systems Thinking conceptualisation and its application to contemporary business issues

 

QUALITY: 100% ORIGINAL PAPER – NO PLAGIARISM – CUSTOM PAPER

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *