|
Module Code and Title
|
IFB205TC Process Management
|
|
School Title
|
School of Intelligent Finance & Business
|
|
Assignment Title
|
Individual Assessment (100%)
|
Assessment Tasks:
Analytic Questions (60%)
1. Compare and contrast the strategies and supporting business processes of Spring Airlines and Air China. That is, do some research by yourself and compare their business strategy in terms of the product dimensions, targeted market segments, and their process architectures. (30 marks) (max. 500 words)
2. Given that your capability of business reception is limited, all customers register through an initial check-in process. Athis or her turn, each customer is seen by a consultant and then exits the process, either with a booking first or with admission to the service directly. Currently, 55 customers per hour arrive at your business, 10 percent of whom are admitted to the service directly. On average, 7 people are waiting to be registered and 34 are registered and waiting to see a consultant. The registration process takes, on average, 2 minutes per customer. Among customers who receive bookings, the average time spent with a consultant is 5 minutes. Among those admitted to the service directly, the average time is 30 minutes.
A triage system has been proposed for the process described above. Under the proposed triage plan, entering customers will be registered as before. They will then be quickly served by an intern who will classify them as normal customers or VIP customers. While normal customers will move on to an area staffed for regular care, VIP customers will betaken to the VIP area. Planners anticipate that the initial classification will take 3 minutes. They expect that, on average, 20 customers will be waiting to register and 5 will be waiting to be seen by the intern. Recall that registration takes an average of 2 minutes per customer. The intern is expected to take an average of 1 minute per customer. Planners expect the regular area to have, on average, 15 customers waiting to be seen. As before, once a customer’s turn comes, each will take 5 minutes of a consultant’s time. The corporation anticipates that, on average, the VIP area will have only 1 customer waiting to be served. As before, once that customer’s turn comes, he or she will take 30 minutes of a consultant’s time. Assume that, as before, 90 percent of all customers are normal customers. Assume, too, that the intern is 100 percent accurate in making classifications. (Assume the process to be stable; that is, average inflow rate equals average outflow rate.) (30 marks)
a. Under the proposed plan, how long, on average, will a customer spend in the business process?
b. On average, how long will a Potential Admit spend in the business process?
c. On average, how many customers will be in the business process?
Simulation Reflection (40%)
Students are required to write a reflective report based on three iterations of hands-on practices in class, it should be 1000+10% words with references excluded.
Students will compose teams for running the business in class. For each iteration, pay attention to your approach adopted and the process performance, for instance, inventory, number of products assembled, material flow, quality, utilisation of resources, teamwork, and any other worthy of reflection.
The analysis should evolve covering the following iterations:
n Iteration 1: Make-to-Stock (Push) Scenario
n Iteration 2: Make-to-Order (Pull) Scenario
n Iteration 3: Customization Scenario
To conclude, the reflective analysis should base on the simulation of:
Issues identified in the iterations with relevant optimization approaches
The reflection shall relate to the Topics of Lectures 7 & 9, ensure your discussion meets the requirements.
1. Submission: Deadline
The penalty will be triggered with the late submission per University Policy.
2. Format Requirements:
Maximum 1000 words for each analytic question.
Assignments must include the cover page with your student ID
Pls. name the file as IFB205TC-PM-YourID
All assignments must be typed, proof-read, and professional in appearance; and saved as PDF only.
The word font should be ‘Times New Roman’ or ‘Calibri Light ’ and font size 12 with 1.5 spacing.
The left and right margins should be ‘Justify ’
Harvard Referencing if citation and references apply
Implications of Content Grading
|
90-100%
|
|
Extremely thorough and authoritative execution of the brief Evidence of significant independent research
Reflective,perceptive, well structured, showing significant originality in ideas or argument
Aptly focused and very well written, few areas for improvement Potentially worthy of publication
|
|
80-89%
|
|
Thorough execution of the brief
Well structured, clearly argued, signs of originality and/or independent critical analytical ability
Supported by independent research
Materials well utilized, well focused and well written Displays mastery of the subject matter
|
|
70-79%
|
|
Good execution of the brief Well focused, knowledgeable
Strong evidence of reading beyond the basic texts
Displays a very good knowledge of the subject matter
|
|
60-69%
|
|
Well structured and well focused with strong evidence of reading beyond the basic texts Thorough and comprehensive in approach
Displays a good knowledge of the subject matter and where appropriate displays sound grasps of relevant theories and concepts
Approach generally analytical
|
|
50-59%
|
|
Competently structured, reasonably well focused and comprehensive, but tending to be descriptive in approach
Limited evidence of reading beyond the basic texts
|
|
40-49%
|
|
Tending to rely entirely on lecture materials
Almost entirely descriptive in approach, limited knowledge and understanding of the subject matter displayed
Partial and/or containing significant errors and/or irrelevancies, poorly structured
|
|
30-39%
|
|
Inadequate execution of the brief
Highly partial and/or containing serious errors
Contents partly or substantially irrelevant, poorly structured Displays little knowledge of the subject matter
|
|
0-29%
|
|
Seriously inadequate execution of the brief
Failure to focus upon the question, seriously short or even devoid of theoretical under- pinning, large sections irrelevant
|