its about a professional service management
its about a professional service management
Assignment Description
This assignment represents 50% of the total marks for this subject; the assessment is worth 100%. The deliverables are:
1) An individual report of not more than 2,500 words (80%)
2) A report presentation (20%)
Learning Outcomes
Students should be able to:
1. Understand the differences of characteristics between professional services and other services and the effects of such differences managerial on managerial approach.
2. Understand how the concept of service quality differs in professional services and other services and how with such understanding managers can design appropriate approach to provide quality service to their customers.
3. Develop appropriate business strategies for professional services in response to the demand of the changing business environment and consumer behaviour.
Part A: Individual Assignment Requirements
Select a service organisation that you are familiar and write a report of not more 2,500 words. You are required to attach a softcopy of your answer in CD format together with your written assignment when making your submission at the designated date.
- Pay a visit to the service organisation to find out more about the service organisation.
- Using the Servuction model, critically explain the factors that influence customer experience at this service organisation. You are required to attach evidences to support your write up.
- Find out the service operation challenges that this service provider have encountered (can be internal and/ or external issues) and what solutions they have implemented.
In your report, you are required to have
- Company background
- The application of the model
- The challenges and recommendations
- Conclusion
- References
|
Criteria No. |
Item |
Percentage of marks allocated |
|
1 |
Knowledge and understanding – familiarity with the subject matters and evidence of original thinking supported by evidence of extensive research |
20% |
|
2 |
Analysis and evaluation – quality of argument or reasoning; depth of analysis; expansion of ideas/arguments; recognition of wider context/complexity of topic(s); evidence of comparison and contrast |
40% |
|
3 |
Referencing and Layout– adhere to Harvard Referencing and consistent page layout. The report should be presented in a very professional manner (i.e. page number, references, table of contents, label for diagram etc.) |
10% |
|
4 |
Language, Grammar and Spelling – good use of language to show clarity in writing with minimal spelling and grammatical errors |
10% |
Part B: Report Presentation
Prepare a 10-15 minutes presentation of your report using PowerPoint slides. The week for presentation will be on week 13 onwards.
Marking criteria
|
Contents
|
– Relevant information are provided in the presentation – Ability to give adequate explanation to the ideas presented in the slides with no or little gaps of knowledge |
10% |
|
Delivery |
– Ability of students to make presentation without reading too much from the slides and/or their notes – Clear and audible oral delivery – Confidence in speech, body gestures and eye contact |
5% |
|
Materials
|
– Slides contents are presented in a concise and consistent manner – Higher marks will be awarded towards creativity in the slides presentation using pictures, photos, statistics, animation, and sounds |
5% |
Submission and Administrative Information
- Groups should include the Coursework Submission and Feedback Form with their submission. The lecturer will give the CSFF before the submission dates.
- Plagiarism is NOT acceptable. Representation of another person’s work as your own, without acknowledgement of the source, for the purpose of satisfying formal assessment requirements is considered plagiarism. The possible consequences of plagiarism include:
Ø Reduced grade for this module
Ø Referral for this module
Ø Failure of this module
Ø Expulsion from the Institution
- You can avoid plagiarism by using correct referencing, citation and paraphrasing.
- You may not copy another individual’s work in any way.
Performance Expectation
Marks are awarded based on the following guidelines:
|
Grade |
Description of performance level
|
|
80% – 100% |
Good interpretation of question and a comprehensive analysis given. Evidence of superior knowledge of module content with clear and convincing application of concepts. Well illustrated with practical examples addressing relevant issues with commendable critical appraisal. Citations must be from between 8 to 10 solid references and interesting arguments are presented based on selected reference sources. Arguments are coherent and convincing in implications, based on reflective reading. Points are supported with valid explanation and good reasoning through a well organized manner and well connected throughout. Shows critical analysis, understanding, thought and reflection of subject matter.
|
|
60% – 79% |
Sufficient points are raised and valid explanations are provided based on accurate identification of issues. Arguments presented are adequate, based on selected text and relevant areas demonstrating knowledge of module content. Implications are relevant but with minor misapprehensions. Citations is from between 5 to 8 solid references. There is sufficient critical analysis of problem and possible solutions, reflecting understanding of subject matter but some areas lacking in depth.
|
|
50% – 59% |
Basic requirements fulfilled, reflecting some understanding of issues and possible solutions. Application of concepts is broadly understood. Recommendations given are based on selected texts. Basic examples are used to illustrate points. Arguments given are elementary/ general and explanations may either be unclear or unhelpful in clarifying points. Assignment quality was reduced either in depth and scope of implications or suggestions or both. Citations is between 3 to 5 reference sources. Assignment not arranged in a structured manner. Sentences and reasoning may have flaws in clarity and meaning.
|
|
Below 50% |
No understanding of the subject matter and failure to address the needs of the question. Points are off-topic and are not related to selected text or required areas. Issues not addressed and not connected to implications or suggestions. No understanding of theories and concepts taught. Weak or no referencing of sources. Argument is sometimes trivial, confused or flawed.
|
