Contents

Learning Outcomes....................................................................................................................3
EDGE...........................................................................................................................................3
Assessment Requirements / Tasks (include all guidance notes)...............................................3
Assessment Criteria....................................................................................................................6
Submission Details.....................................................................................................................6
Feedback....................................................................................................................................7
Marking Criteria.........................................................................................................................8
Additional Information...............................................................................................................9
Referencing Requirements (Harvard)....................................................................................9
Mitigating Circumstances.......................................................................................................9
Unfair Practice........................................................................................................................9

Page 1 of 9
Learning Outcomes

This assessment is designed to demonstrate a student’s completion of the following

Learning Outcomes:
 Critically evaluate, and reflexively apply, methods, techniques and tools for
assessing, controlling and improving organisational processes (number 1 in the
module descriptor)
 Critically demonstrate an appreciation of issues relating to the analysis of business
processes in organisations (number 2 in the module descriptor)
 Create appropriate visual representations of their analysis via use of an appropriate
tool (number 3 in the module descriptor)

EDGE

The Cardiff Met EDGE supports students in graduating with the knowledge, skills, and
attributes that allow them to contribute positively and effectively to the communities in
which they live and work.
This module assessment provides opportunities for students to demonstrate development
of the following EDGE Competencies:
ETHICAL NA
DIGITAL The knowledge and skills required for the role of Business Analyst to
evaluate and demonstrate data-driven business analysis with
creative recommendations on improving business financial standing
based on technology.
GLOBAL Exposure to Industrial role of business analyst by analysing publicly
traded business.
ENTREPRENEURIA The expertise to evaluate an industry sector/business for
L entrepreneurship and propose viable solutions for business planning
and operations.

Assessment Requirements / Tasks (include all guidance notes)

This assessment consists of following two parts:

 Part 1: Business process analysis (75% weightage – 3000 Words)

 Part 2: Business data analysis (25% weightage – 1000 Words)
The rest of the section provides the detailed description of the tasks required for each part
of the assessment.
Part 1: Business process analysis (75% weight for the Final grade – 3000 Words)
You are working as a business analyst in a UK based consultancy firm. You are assigned a
task to provide 3000 words report of business analysis for a publicly traded
UK/US/European business that is highly affected by Brexit and COVID-19. The report is

Page 2 of 9
required to be of appropriate format, the standard of presentation and content. The
purpose of the report is twofold: to discover, analyse and comment on the inadequacies of
the company business processes; and, in doing so, to justify and evaluate an appropriate
selection of Business Analysis techniques and tools.
This assignment is potentially very broad in scope: it is up to you to determine the business,
exact scope of investigation and justify this. You need to cite the sources you refer to in
finding out more about this process. You will need to select, apply and evaluate techniques
and tools which provide for all five activities (strategy analysis, investigate situation,
consider perspectives, analyse needs and define requirements) and, by necessity,
encompass at least two of the three paradigms (socio-technical, functional and object-
oriented). The following table is a reminder of those which we have, or will, cover in class.
Other techniques and tools may be appropriate; confirm these with the Module Leader on
or before the 11th week of the module.

Strategy Investigate Consider Analyse Define

Analysis Situation Perspectives Needs Requirements
Socio- External Rich picture CATWOE X X
Technical environment Type of
analysis Participation
Thomas-
Internal Kilmann
environment Power-
analysis Interest
Functional DFD Context X Structured DFD, ERM and
Diagram techniques ELH
Object - Context X Use Cases Class and
Oriented diagram Sequence
diagrams

Theme Required Tools

Strategy analysis (PESTEL Analysis OR Michael Porter’s Five Forces Model) AND Resource
Audit
Investigate Rich Picture AND (UML Context Diagram OR DFD Context Diagram)
situation
Consider CATWOE AND Power/interest grid
perspective
Note: CATWOE analysis for each stakeholder
Analyse needs (Structured English OR Decision Table OR Decision Tree) AND UML Use
Case diagrams and Use Case descriptions

Page 3 of 9
 Define (Level 0 and Level 1 DFD Diagrams and descriptions) AND UML Class and
requirements Sequence Diagrams

Task 1 (300 words): An introduction that includes a definition and justification of selection
of a publicly traded business, scope, a brief description of the context and nature of the
problem and the current level of operational performance as depicted in external sources,
where appropriate citing sources according to the Harvard system. The selection of the
business must be based on evidence such as cashflow statement, balance sheet and net
income profit. (Hint: For publicly traded businesses cash flow statement, balance sheet and
net income profit statements are available on Yahoo Finance or their websites under the
investor relation section)
Task 2 (300 words): A justification of your chosen package of techniques and tools (pre-
application), by reference to your own criteria, where appropriate citing sources according
to the Harvard system.
Task 3 (1500 words): An application to the scenario of your chosen package of techniques
and tools for all five activities (strategy analysis, investigate situation, consider perspectives,
analyse needs and define requirements), produced using a CASE tool if appropriate,
together with assumptions and appropriate description/documentation*
Task 4 (400 words): Comments and observations on the inadequacies of the current system,
including recommendations to the QAA, where appropriate citing elements of your
application (#5) together with sources according to the Harvard system.
Task 5 (500 words): An evaluation of the ‘fit’ of your chosen package of techniques and
tools to this specific context (post-application), by reference to your own criteria (#4), where
appropriate citing sources according to the Harvard system.

*Refer to lecture notes for guidance on how these should be done. As an example, if you use
DFDs to define requirements you should include here for that part of the fifth activity:
a) Level 0 DFD, produced using a CASE tool, and assumptions
b) Level 1 DFD, produced using a CASE tool, and further assumptions
c) External Entity Descriptions
d) Elementary Process Descriptions for each process at its lowest decomposed level
e) Input/Output Descriptions for data flows that cross the system boundary

Part 2: Business data analysis (25% weight for the Final grade – 1000 words)

Page 4 of 9
The aim of this assignment is to provide students with the opportunity to gain experience
and to develop skills in obtaining business dataset (using associative learning techniques).
Students need to explain market basket analysis, association rules, importance of different
parameters (e.g., support, confidence, lift etc.), check the outcome of Apriori algorithm with
changing the parameters (e.g. support, Confidence, lift etc.) and explain the outcomes (e.g.
some suggestions from association rule).
Students could choose a dataset from the pool of datasets given by the module leader and
analyse the data and present insights into the business using Spyder(Python) (1000 words
equivalent).
Task 1: Introduction
Task 2: Application (Business insights, Comments, observations and recommendations)
Task 3: Conclusion

*Refer to lecture notes for guidance on how these should be done. As an example, you can
see the lecture/video in the folder ‘Market Basket Analysis’ in Moodle).

Assessment Criteria

Part 1: Business process analysis 75%

weight
Task 1: Introduction 10%
Task 2: Justification 10%
Task 3: Application 30%
Task 4: Comments, observations and recommendations 15%
Task 5: Evaluation 10%
Part 2: Business data analysis 25%
weight
Task 1: Introduction 6%
Task 2: Analysis 12%
Task 3: Conclusion 7%

Submission Details

Please see Moodle for confirmation of the Assessment submission date.

Submission will be by 4:00pm on the deadline day.
Any assessments submitted after the deadline will not be marked and will be recorded as
a Non-Attempt.
The assessment must be submitted as a zip file / pdf / word document through the Turnitin
submission point in Moodle

Page 5 of 9
Your assessment should be titled with your Student ID Number, module code and
assessment id, e.g. st12345678 CIS7026 WRIT1

Feedback

Feedback for the assessment will be provided electronically via Moodle, and will normally
be available 4 working weeks after initial submission. The feedback return date will be
confirmed on Moodle.
Feedback will be provided in the form of a rubric and supported with comments on your
strengths and the areas which you improve.
All marks are preliminary and are subject to quality assurance processes and confirmation at
the Examination Board.
Further information on the Academic and Feedback Policy in available in the Academic
Handbook (Vol 1, Section 4.0)

Page 6 of 9
Marking Criteria

70 – 100% A very comprehensive technically correct submission. All major aspects of

(Distinction) the assignment covered. Clear expression of ideas. A very high standard of
presentation. All problems identified and solutions are feasible and within
the restrictions of the assignment. All sources acknowledged and
referenced to a high standard.
60-69% Most major aspects of the assignment covered with supporting
(Merit) explanation and discussion of their roles. Some minor technical errors and
misconceptions. Good identification of problems and good solutions. Good
presentation and standard of referencing.
50-59% Demonstrates mastery of a complex and specialised area of knowledge,
(Pass) but is frequently descriptive and based on given sources. There is limited
evidence of independent thinking.
40-49% Demonstrates limited knowledge and understanding of the field of study
(Narrow relevant to the task. Factual inaccuracies, errors and misconceptions are
Fail) evident in important areas and elements of the assessed work may be
irrelevant to the task.
0-39% The level of attainment that falls well below the standard required to pass
(Fail) a Masters degree. The work presented for assessment may be very poor,
incomplete and/or irrelevant and will demonstrates a serious lack of
comprehension and/or engagement with the set task. Students awarded
marks within this band may have misunderstood or misinterpreted the set
task. No learning outcomes are met in full although there maybe minimal
attainment in relation to one or two.

Page 7 of 9
Additional Information

Referencing Requirements (Harvard)

The Harvard (or author-date) format should be used for all references (including images).
Further information on Referencing can be found at Cardiff Met’s Academic Skills website.

Mitigating Circumstances
If you have experienced changes or events which have adversely affected your academic
performance on the assessment, you may be eligible for Mitigating Circumstances (MCs).
You should contact your Module Leader, Personal Tutor or Year Tutor in the first instance.
An application for MCs, along with appropriate supporting evidence, can be submitted via
the following link to the MCs Dashboard
Applications for MCs should ideally be submitted as soon as possible after circumstances
occur & at the time of the assessment. Applications must be submitted before the relevant
Examination Board.
Further information on the Mitigating Circumstances procedure is available in the Academic
Handbook (Volume 1, Section 5)

Unfair Practice
Cardiff Metropolitan University takes issues of unfair practice extremely seriously. The
University has distinct procedures and penalties for dealing with unfair practice in
examination or non-examination conditions. These are explained in full in the University's
Unfair Practice Procedure (Academic Handbook: Vol 1, Section 8)
Types of Unfair Practice, include:
Plagiarism, which can be defined as using without acknowledgement another person’s
words or ideas and submitting them for assessment as though it were one’s own work, for
instance by copying, translating from one language to another or unacknowledged
paraphrasing. Further examples include:
 Use of any quotation(s) from the published or unpublished work of other persons,
whether published in textbooks, articles, the Web, or in any other format, which
quotations have not been clearly identified as such by being placed in quotation
marks and acknowledged.
 Use of another person’s words or ideas that have been slightly changed or
paraphrased to make it look different from the original.
 Summarising another person’s ideas, judgments, diagrams, figures, or computer
programmes without reference to that person in the text and the source in a
bibliography or reference list.
 Use of services of essay banks and/or any other agencies.
 Use of unacknowledged material downloaded from the Internet.

Page 8 of 9
  Re-use of one’s own material except as authorised by the department.
Collusion, which can be defined as when work that that has been undertaken with others is
submitted and pas
sed off as solely the work of one person. An example of this would be where several
students work together on an assessment and individually submit work which contains
sections which are the same. Assessments briefs will clearly identify where joint preparation
and joint submission is specifically permitted, in all other cases it is not.
Fabrication of data, making false claims to have carried out experiments, observations,
interviews or other forms of data collection and analysis, or acting dishonestly in any other
way.

Page 9 of 9