1 OVERVIEW OF ASSESSMENTS: BISM7208 Course Lecturer: Dr Christoph Breidbach Course Coordinator: Dr Tapani Rinta-Kahila Contact email for questions: [email protected] ASSESSMENT 1 – EMERGING TECHNOLOGY: THEORY AND ANALYSIS This presentation assessment consists of two parts: 1) Individual video presentation to be uploaded in week 6 (worth 25%) 2) Team presentation between week 4–7 in class, depending on industry assigned (worth 10%) Part 2 (team presentation) of this assessment will be undertaken by teams. NOTE: this project cannot be completed individually – it must be completed in a team. The team members must be officially signed on to the same group. You are expected to decide your team membership in week 1 latest, and to submit your list of 4 or 5 team members (most teams to be 5) at that time online. Further instructions will be given in the first lecture. Please note: as a courtesy to others, if you decide to withdraw from the course, please inform your team. Teams should start at 5 members so that one member withdrawing will minimise the impact. As part of the team-formation process in the course, all students and their teams will be assigned to an industry context (i.e., healthcare, retail, etc). This context will for the foundation for your first assignment. Part 1: Individual Video Presentation Type: Theoretical analysis of an established technology that had a transformative impact on the industry context assigned to you Due Date: Week 6, Fri 3 September, 5:00pm (AEST) Weight: 25% Task Description: The purpose of the individual presentation is for you to analyse a technology that can be considered established in your industry, by applying the theories discussed in weeks 1–2. Specifically, you will explore the impact of your chosen technology on businesses in your industry context. Your task is to a) select and describe an established technology that has had a transformative impact on your industry in the past (‘what’), b) discuss how it influenced the industry, and c) critically analyse, using a (1) theory of your choice, what made (or did not make) this technology successful compared to other technical innovations at the time (‘why’). Once again, this analysis will require you to draw upon and apply one (1) of the theories previously discussed in class (during weeks 1–2), and to justify why the chosen theory is appropriate. REQUIREMENTS AND FORMAT: Each student is asked to prepare a presentation of 10 minutes (including PPT slides), and to record the presentation. Please note that the quality of the recording will not be assessed, hence no editing of the video file is required. For example, you could set up a Zoom call with yourselves and use the 2 file of the recording. Students will then be asked to submit their assignments online. Instructions on how to submit will be provided. MARKING RUBRIC FOR INDIVIDUAL PRESENTATION EXCEPTIONAL – 20 ADVANCED – 16 PROFICIENT – 12 FUNCTIONAL – 8 DEVELOPING – 4 ABSENT – 0 Introduction and history of innovation/ transformative technology (20%) Submission clearly articulates a complete introduction and history of the technology’s emergence. An excellent justification for why the technology has been chosen is provided. Submission articulates a complete introduction and history of the technology’s emergence. A clear justification for why the technology has been chosen is provided. Submission contains a sound introduction and history of the technology. A satisfactory justification for why the technology has been chosen is provided. Submission contains an adequate introduction and history of the technology. A shallow justification for why the technology has been chosen is provided. Submission does not adequately articulate an introduction and history of the technology. Justification for why the technology has been chosen is unclear. Submission does not introduce or provide any history of the technology. No justification for why the technology has been chosen is provided. Theory (20%) Submission expertly and concisely describes the theory and how that theory explains the impact the innovation has had on industry. Submission accurately describes the theory and how that theory explains the impact the innovation has had on industry. Submission includes a strong description of the theory and how that theory explains the impact the innovation has had on industry. Submission includes an adequate description of the theory and how that theory explains the impact the innovation has had on industry. Submission does not sufficiently explain the theory, or how that theory explains the impact the innovation has had on industry. Submission does not explain the theory, or how that theory explains the impact the innovation has had on industry. Description of Consequences Significance (20%) Submission comprehensively and clearly describes the consequences and impact of the innovation. Signifi cance is expertly argued with highly relevant examples. Submission describes the consequences and impact of the innovation in detail. Significanc e is strongly argued with relevant examples. Submission effectively describes the consequences and impact of the innovation. Signifi cance is well argued with examples. Submission describes the consequences and impact of the innovation. Signifi cance is argued with examples. Submission begins to describe the consequences and impact of the innovation. The argument for significance could be clearer and stronger and better examples used. Submission does not describe the consequences and impact of the innovation. Signifi cance is not argued and no appropriate examples are provided. Analysis of Impact (20%) Submission comprehensively analyses the impact the innovation has had on society. The changes/disruptio ns the innovation has affected are systematically detailed, with clear and relevant examples provided that support the analysis. Submission effectively analyses the impact the innovation has had on society. The changes/disruptio ns the innovation has affected are discussed in detail, providing examples that support the analysis. Submission analyses the impact the innovation has had on society. The changes/disruptio ns the innovation has affected are outlined, providing examples that support the analysis. Submission effectively analyses the impact the innovation has had on society. The changes/disruptio ns the innovation has affected are mentioned, with some examples provided. Submission does not sufficiently explore the impact the innovation has had on society. The changes/disruptio ns the innovation has affected are not satisfactorily discussed and the examples do not support the analysis. Submission does not explore the impact the innovation has had on society. The changes/disruptio ns the innovation has affected are not outlined and examples have not been provided. Presentation & Delivery (20%) The submission is lively and highly engaging. It clearly communicates the intentions of the author, and is easily understood. The submission is engaging. It communicates the intentions of the author, and is well understood. The submission is engaging and communicates the intentions of the author well. The meaning is generally clear. The submission is sufficiently engaging and generally communicates at an acceptable level. The meaning is generally clear. The submission is lacking in engagement and struggles to communicate. The meaning is often unclear. The submission fails to engage or communicate, and is very unclear. 3 The submission is imaginative and professionally presented. Visuals that have been selected are appropriate and consistent across the submission. The submission is professionally presented. Visuals that have been selected are appropriate and consistent across the submission. The submission is well presented. Visuals that have been selected are appropriate. The submission is adequately presented. Visuals that have been selected are mostly appropriate. The submission is unevenly presented. Visuals that have been selected are not appropriate. The format chosen for the submission is unprofessional and not of an acceptable standard. Part 2: Team Presentation Type: Introduction and analysis of an emerging or radical new technology Due Date: Weeks 4–7 Weight: 10% Task Description: The purpose of the team presentation is to build your understanding of how and why technological innovations emerge, and to explore the possible impact emerging, radical or future technologies can have on businesses and society more broadly. Each team will be assigned to an industry context (the same context that applies to your individual presentation). Your team’s task is to a) select and describe a radical new or emerging technology, b) to discuss how it might influence your assigned industry in years to come, and c) to consider what makes (or could make) this technology successful compared to other innovations. Starting in week 4, part of each seminar session will be devoted to the presentations of current or emerging transformative technologies by the respective teams. REQUIREMENTS AND FORMAT: Each team is asked to prepare a presentation of 10 minutes, followed by 5 minutes of facilitated in- class discussions/Q&A. All members of the team are asked to participate. I understand that a single person only can share the Zoom screen at a time. We will not j
udge technical (i.e., Zoom) execution. MARKING RUBRIC FOR TEAM PRESENTATION Structure Slides Q&A Content Delivery (Use of voice, etc.) Your Mark (0-10) -Poor: 0 – Good: 2 – Very good: 3/4 – Excellent: 5 – Poor: 0 – Good: 2 – Very good: 3/4 – Excellent: 5 – Poor: 0 – Good: 2 – Very good: 3/4 – Excellent: 5 – Poor: 0 – Good: 2 – Very good: 3/4 – Excellent: 5 – Poor: 0 – Good: 2 – Very good: 3/4 – Excellent: 5 (x of 35) converted to 0-100 percent, adjusted decimal point 4 ASSESSMENT 2 – MID-SEMESTER EXAM The purpose of this assignment is to demonstrate your understanding of, and ability to apply, the theoretical constructs presented in the readings and discussed in class. The exam will be multiple- choice and conducted online. Type: Online Exam Due Date: The exam will be held in class on week 11 and will cover the readings up until this point in the semester. Weight: 20% The online exam will be marked automatically, and you will receive a total mark out of 20. ASSESSMENT 3 – DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION HACKATHON As with ‘Part 2’ of A1, this assessment will be undertaken by teams. NOTE: this project cannot be completed individually – it must be completed in a team. The team members must be officially signed on to the same group. You are expected to decide your team membership in week 1 latest, and to submit your list of 4 or 5 team members (most teams to be 5) at that time online. Further instructions will be given in the first lecture. Please note: as a courtesy to others, if you decide to withdraw from the course, please inform your team. Teams should start at 5 members so that one member withdrawing will minimise the impact. Overview: The second assessment for this course is a group assignment in two parts, both centred around the development of a business model for a transformative digital or otherwise emerging technology. The hackathon itself will be guided by a theme and overall objective, to be announced in class in week 7. Assessment 3 consists of two parts: 1) A 10-minute pitch for the business model, delivered in week 12 (worth 20%) 2) A 1000-word report demonstrating a synthesis of the business model presented (25%) Logical flow of presentation Quality slides that support message Ability to answer questions while keeping within time limit Relevance and evidence of solid research related to technology presented Presentation style for concise and clear delivery of information (we will not deduct marks for technical difficulties) 5 Part 1: Hackathon Pitch Type: Team presentation Due Date: Week 12 Weight: 20% The purpose of this assignment is to build your ability to create and deliver a convincing narrative summarising the business model and value proposition for a new or emerging transformative technology to a general audience. Your team will pitch the business idea that results from the ‘Digital Transformation Hackathon’. Your presentation must demonstrate an in-depth understanding of who the intended customer is, how the value proposition addresses a need, and outline a well-developed solution, including a complete business model. The presentation also needs to cover an explanation of the process with which the team developed the business model, including results of the data collected and analysed. All teams will present their final ‘pitches’ in week 12. Each team is asked to prepare a presentation of 10 minutes, followed by 5 minutes of facilitated in- class discussions/Q&A. All members of the team are asked to participate. 1) QUALITY OF VALUE PROPOSITION AND BUSINESS MODEL (50%) Marks The Need of the value proposition was clearly presented (0 – 10) Is the value proposition based on a clearly identifiable client/customer need Is it innovative, bold, and world-changing Has the need been clearly defined and supported The Value Proposition will meet the need. (0 – 10) Does the idea represent a truly original concept Has technical feasibility been demonstrated Is there a path to commercialization The team presented a complete and coherent business model (0-10) Do individual business model components support the value proposition Did the team discuss all relevant business model components Did the team justify their decisions sufficiently The Benefits of this business model are clear. (0 – 10) Is the value proposition clearly defined Is there market data to support the proposed strategy Does the idea have a competitive advantage Is it a viable investment candidate (e.g. would you invest your own money in it) The Customer Segments and Relationships are clear. (0 – 10) Has the team clearly identified customer segments and relationships Is there a plan to mitigate potential risks Is feasibility based on evidence or assertions 2) QUALITY OF MATERIAL/SLIDES (20%) The slides are well structured (0-5) The slides are balanced (e.g. not too much text, too many figures, etc) (0-5) The slides are free of typos and formatting issues (0-5) 6 The slides support the speaker and convey a clear message (0-5) 3) QUALITY OF THE PRESENTATION (30%) The presenter uses voice appropriately (e.g. by speaking clearly, not too fast, etc) (0-10) Is the presenter’s body language (in camera) appropriate (0-10) Overall, does the presentation seem interesting and engaging (0-10) Total Percentage Total Converted Marks (based on percentage /20) Part 2: Business Model Report Type: An in-depth report outlining the results of the ‘Digital Transformation Hackathon’ Due Date: Week 13 Weight: 25% The purpose of this assignment is to build your ability to create and deliver a narrative summarising the business model and value proposition for a new or emerging transformative technology to a managerial audience. You may think of the report as a document a start-up might submit to an investor seeking funding. The report must demonstrate an in-depth understanding of who the intended customer is, how the value proposition addresses a need, and outline a well-developed solution, including a complete business model canvas with all nine components. The report also needs to cover an explanation of the process with which the team developed the business model, including an overview and results of the data collected and analysed. Teams are also asked to include an analysis of potential competitors/competing technologies. You may draw on and use the theoretical lenses included in the course. Format: – Calibri or similar font, 12-point, 1.5 line-spacing, 1 inch margins all around (A4 paper). Minimum 1000 words (with 10% upwards flexibility, total world limit 1100 words (not including references or appendices). – Report should be submitted online. One team one report. Information on how to submit the report will be provided in class. MARKING RUBRIC: Section Criteria Available Marks Result Quality of Value Proposition and Business Model (50 marks) The Need of the value proposition is clearly articulated 0-10 Is the value proposition based on a clearly identifiable client/customer need Is it innovative, bold, and world-changing Has the need been clearly defined and supported The Value Proposition will meet the need. 0-10 7 Does the idea represent a truly original concept Has technical feasibility been demonstrated Is there a path to commercialization The team presented a complete and coherent business model 0-10 Do individual business model components support the value proposition Did the team discuss all relevant business model components Did the team justify their decisions sufficiently The Benefits of this business model are clear 0-10 Is the value proposition clearly defined Is there market data to support the proposed business model components Does the idea have a competitive advantage Is it a viable investment candidate (e.g. would you invest your own money in it) The Customer Segments and Relationships are clear. 0-10 Has the team clearly identified customer segments and relationships Is there a plan to mitigate potential risks Is feasibility based on evidence or assertions Explanation of iterative design approach taken (Appendix) (20 marks) Does the team report on iteration cycles 0-5 Is sufficient data provided 0-5 Are iterations explained and reasons provided for why changes were made in response to feedback 0-5 Summary of ‘lessons learnt’ 0-5 Quality of Report (30 marks) The report is well structured 0-5 The report is balanced (e.g. not too much text, too many figures, etc) 0-5 The report is free of typos and formatting issues 0-5 The report contains sufficient data to support the arguments 0-5 Overall, the report is interesting and engaging 0-10 TOTAL MARKS /100 Late Penalty: 5% of the total available marks per calendar day Over length penalty: 3 marks if report exceeds 1,100 words (excluding the Appendix) Total Converted Marks /25 8 FINAL REMARKS: Peer Evaluation. As this is a group project, peer evaluation is required and is to consider the contribution of individuals to all activities completed as this team. Further details will be provided in class. Your evaluation must be evidence based. For example, the record of meetings and attendance is part of this evidence. These, coupled with the signed project plan, will contribute to the evidence. However, if major issues within the team arise, must have been brought to the course coordinator’s attention in advance, not a few days before or after a submission.