HI5019 STRATEGIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS T3 2017 HOLMES INSTITUTE FACULTY OF HIGHER EDUCATION HI5019 STRATEGIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS

HI5019 STRATEGIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS T3 2017 HOLMES INSTITUTE FACULTY OF HIGHER EDUCATION HI5019 STRATEGIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS Trimester 3 2017 Assignment 1 (Literature Review) Individual Assignment (Week 6, Friday 5 pm) Each student will write a literature review of NOT more than 2500 words. The review should demonstrate that the student has thoroughly researched their topic. Students should use examples of business practice from the scholarly journals papers, conferences, books and professional magazines to support their arguments The literature review would be on how Strategic Information System help organisations to achieve an alignment between the strategic goals of the organisation and the current and future IT infrastructure of the organisation. The literature review will cover: 1. Identification and discussion of the chosen company’s structure, products and services under consideration 2. Operations and functionality: Identify and discuss a. The current processes b. Any gaps and what is not working properly c. Which specific issues that the new system will fix d. Criteria that will be used to prove the proposed system meets requirements 3. Discuss what constitutes an Information Systems (IS) Strategy and explain why such strategy is needed as part of the overall organisational strategy. 4. Discuss why the organisation may experience difficulties in developing an Information Systems Strategy. As part of your answer you should suggest solutions to the difficulties you discuss. 5. With reference to your studies on Information Systems failures: a. Analyse the typical problems that might be expected to arise within Information Systems projects. b. Illustrate your answer with reference to literature and any relevant examples. c. Suggest remedies to the problems you have identified. HI5019 STRATEGIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS T3 2017 Submission Requirements: Please make sure the submission has the appropriate presentation and writing style. The research should include a list of at least 5 references used in the research report and a bibliography of the wider reading done to familiarize oneself with the topic. All reports must use the Harvard referencing style Self-check submission allows two attempts and shows the similarity level of your submission contents to other students’ submissions. So please make sure the submission percentage is not high and you’ve paraphrased the contents of your submission in your own English. You are reminded to read the “Plagiarism” section of the course description. Your research should be a synthesis of ideas from a variety of sources expressed in your own words Submission:  Soft copy to self-check and to Final Submission with signed cover sheet Marking rubric is attached. HI5019 STRATEGIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS T3 2017 Assessment Criteria: Score Very Good (12-15) Good (9-11) Satisfactory (8-10) Unsatisfactory (5-7) Presentation and writing style /15 marks Information is well organized. Correct layout including times new roman, font size 12 or calibri, font size10, double spaced. About the right length. Very well written, excellent paraphrasing and proper grammar and punctuation are used throughout. Information is organized, Correct layout including times new roman, font size 12 or calibri, font size10, double spaced. About the right length. Well written, some paraphrasing and proper grammar and punctuation Information is somewhat organized, Some elements of layout or length incorrect. Proper grammar and punctuation mostly used, but overuse of direct quotes. Information is poorly organized, Some elements of layout or length incorrect. Proper grammar and punctuation not always used. Excessive overuse of direct quotes Score Very Good (12-15) Good (9-11) Satisfactory (8-10) Unsatisfactory (5-7) Introduction /15 marks Introduces the topic of the research report in an extremely engaging manner which arouses the reader’s interest. Gives a detailed general background and indicates the overall “plan”. Introduces the topic of the research report in an engaging manner which arouses the reader’s interest. Gives some general background and indicates the overall “plan” of the report. Satisfactorily introduces the topic of the research report. Gives a general background. Indicates the overall “plan” of the report. Introduces the topic of the research report, but omits a general background of the topic and/or the overall “plan” of the report. Score Very Good (17-20) Good (13-16) Satisfactory (10-12) Unsatisfactory (6-9) Evidence of Research /20 marks Substantial range of appropriate and current, supportive evidence Good range of appropriate and current, supportive evidence. Suitable range of supportive evidence used. Not always appropriate and/or current. Minimum cited. Insufficient range or number of supportive evidence used. Score Very Good (25-30) Good (20-24) Satisfactory (15-19) Unsatisfactory (9-14) Development of Discussion /30 marks Logical, insightful, original discussion with wellconnected paragraphs. Evidence of full engagement with the literature found, with relevant and detailed analysis. Detailed, original discussion develops logically with some connection between adjoining paragraphs. Understanding of reading shown. Some relevant analysis. Adequate discussion develops logically. Understanding of reading shown. Few relevant analysis. Inadequate discussion of issues and/or lacking in logical flow Little/no demonstrated understanding of reading. None/little discussion or analysis. HI5019 STRATEGIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS T3 2017 Score Very Good (9-10) Good (7-8) Satisfactory (5-6) Unsatisfactory (3-4) Conclusion /10 marks An interesting, well written summary of the main points. An excellent final comment on the subject, based on the information provided. A good summary of the main points. A good final comment on the subject, based on the information provided. Satisfactory summary of the main points. A final comment on the subject, but introduced new material. Poor/no summary of the main points. A poor final comment on the subject and/or new material introduced. Score Very Good (9-10) Good (7-8) Satisfactory (5-6) Unsatisfactory (3-4) Referencing /10 marks Correct referencing (Harvard) All quoted material in quotes and acknowledged. All paraphrased material acknowledged. Correctly set out reference list and bibliography included. Mostly correct referencing (Harvard) All quoted material in quotes and acknowledged. All paraphrased material acknowledged. Mostly correct setting out reference list and bibliography included. Mostly correct referencing (Harvard) Some problems with quoted material and paraphrased material Some problems with the reference list or bibliography. Not all material correctly acknowledged. Some problems with the reference list or bibliography. Total /100 marks Final marks /20 General Comments: