MGT603 Systems Thinking – Torrens University Australia

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

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 businessissues. 

▪ 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 1 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 a significant  issue/challenge/problem for your selected case organisation during 2023 and how “Systems  Thinking Approach” can assist in making optimal decisions by applying Step 1  

(problem/issue/challenge Identification), Step 2 (Rich Picture) and first half of Step 3  (CATWOE Analysis) of Soft Systems Methodology (SSM). 

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 propose 2 – 3 recommendations/procedures/policies using Systems Thinking approach to help overcome theproblem. 

Key points to consider in your MGT603 Assessment 1 (Part A): 

▪ Assessment 1 (Part A) must be submitted in WORD document format.  

▪ Make sure to check your assessment document with SafeAssign before submitting it for  marking/evaluation. A copy of the SafeAssign report should be submitted with your  Assessment 1 (Part A) WORD document format as well. 

▪ 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, and student ID. 

▪ 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 in depth. 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.).

MGT603_ Assessment 1_ Part A and Part B Page 2 of 7 

▪ 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 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): 

▪ Assessment 1 (Part B) must be submitted in ONE WORD document format.  

▪ Make sure to check your assessment document with SafeAssign before submitting it for  marking/evaluation. A copy of the SafeAssign report should be submitted with your  Assessment 1 (Part B) WORD document format as well. 

▪ 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 and student ID. 

▪ 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).

MGT603_ Assessment 1_ Part A and Part B Page 3 of 7 

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. 

Submission Instructions 

For each assessment (e.g. MGT603 Assessment 1 Part A, MGT603 Assessment 1 Part B), please  submit ONLY 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 4 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 5 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 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%
					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 resourcesto  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.

^{MGT603_ Assessment 1_ Part A and Part B} Page 7 of 7