Assessment Brief 2024/2025
Please make sure you carefully read and understand the question or task. If you have unanswered questions, please post these on the course Moodle Discussion Forum, and we’ll respond.
Assignment Information
Course Code
|
MGT5395
|
Course Title
|
A Systems Approach to Technology Management
|
Weighting
|
100%
|
Question release date
|
5th March 2025
|
Submission date:
|
18/04/2025
|
Grades and Feedback to be released on:
|
|
Word limit
|
3,000
|
Action to be taken if word limit is exceeded
|
If the word count exceeds the specified limit by more than 10% (i.e., exceeds 2,750 words), a deduction of one grade point will be applied.
|
1. QUESTION/ DESCRIPTION OF ACTIVITY
This is an individual assignment.
Context
NexBank is a well-established mid-sized bank (£50-100bn in assets) headquartered in the UK with a strong regional presence. The bank is organized into four main business divisions: Retail Banking, Corporate Banking, Risk Management, and a Sustainability & Innovation Unit. With an extensive network of branches and a legacy IT infrastructure, NexBank is now under pressure to integrate digital technologies across its operations in order to transform. its business model.
The Challenge
In response to new UK regulatory requirements issued by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and the Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy (BEIS), NexBank must now report on its Scope 3 greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. These regulations mandate that banks provide transparent, accurate, and continuous reporting on emissions generated indirectly through their value chain – including emissions from suppliers, partners, and the use of funds by customers. Failure to comply could result in fines, reputational damage, and difficulties in raising capital.
Different parts of the bank are not functioning well together to implement the system, and this means that the bank as a whole cannot report on or manage its emissions. New legislation is now in force that requires banks to explain how they will be reporting their emissions and subsequently to provide those reports, or they will face fines, and it will be difficult for them to raise capital.
Describe how you would use the Soft Systems Methodology (SSM) to identify the individuals and groups that should be involved in the process, how you would engage with them, how you would use the tools of the SSM to identify a solution, and how the re-designed socio-technical system might be evaluated.
Assessment Brief
· This assessment is designed to test your understanding of the soft systems methodology and socio-technical systems theory.
· The scenario above deliberately doesn’t detail the bank or the situation. You need to make this up. Create a fictitious bank and describe a fictitious situational issue in enough detail to show how you will apply the SSM. (Be careful not to go into too much detail so that it takes up the word count that you need for the rest of the.)
· Ensure the situational issue you invent allows you to fully express your understanding of the SSM, why it is relevant to the situation, how to apply it, and how to validate it using socio-technical systems theory.
· Describe in detail each step of the SSM and what you would do to carry out each of the steps.
· Show how you would use socio-technical systems theory to evaluate the resulting sociotechnical system before it is implemented.
· Identify any risks involved in carrying out each of the steps and how you would manage these
· Consider how you would ensure the longer-term (ongoing) management of the transformation.
**The purpose of this assessment is to demonstrate that you know how you would approach the problem presented using SSM to find the solution. You do not need to provide a solution.**
Proposed Report Outline
The following provides some advice on the report’s structure (Section headings and content) and some guidance on how the marks will be distributed amongst the different components of the report. These are included in brackets at the end of each paragraph. Use these percentages to guide you in the relative level of detail needed in each part.
Background (20%)
Introduce NexBank and describe the situation that you are facing. Identify the worldviews and draw a rich picture. Note: you will need to make some assumptions here that go beyond the description above.
1. Introduction (10%)
Give a very brief history of the origins of SSM. Explain how ideas borrowed from complex systems theory are adopted in the SSM, and outline some of the key assumptions behind the methodology. In what circumstances would you consider using the SSM? Outline the origins and purpose of socio-technical systems theory and suggest how the two frameworks should inform. each other in the analysis of the transformation process (as you will need to explicitly link insights from SSM with the evaluative framework of socio-technical systems theory later).
2. Application of SSM (30%)
List the steps used in SSM and how they relate to each other (include a diagram). Describe in detail how you would carry out each step to find a solution to the situation in your fictitious bank. Take care to include a description of how you would use SSM to:
i. ensure everyone understands the current situation (i.e. how would you construct the baseline purposeful activity map);
ii. derive the ‘PQR’ of the Root Definition;
iii. help everyone identify and understand the range of perspectives (worldviews) held by different actors in the company;
iv. summarise (i)-(iii) in a table using the CATWOE framework;
v. use this understanding to help all actors respect different worldviews but identify the compromise that is needed;
vi. co-create the design for a new set of processes (linked purposeful activities) that the organisation should follow.
Explain how the outcomes of this transformation should be monitored and evaluated for continuous refinement and improvement of the socio-technical system. Note that you do not need to find a solution; just describe the steps (i) – (vi) you would take to find a solution.
Application of Socio-Technical Systems Theory (25%)
List the elements of Sociotechnical Systems Theory. Explain how you would apply each of the elements to evaluate the design of a new sociotechnical system delivered by the SSM. Explain how you would act on the outcome of that evaluation.
Conclusions (15%)
In this final section, describe the steps you would take to identify the key risks associated with the transformation and how to manage these. (Again, note that you do not need to identify the risks, just the steps needed to identify them). Consider how the transformation should be managed in the medium- to long-term to ensure that the solution is continuously evaluated and refined as required. What do you think is the single most important lesson a company should learn from the SSM approach?
2. ASSESSMENT RUBRIC/ CRITERIA
|
4
Advanced
Exceeds expectations Excellent
|
3
Competent
Meets expectations
Very good
|
2
Progressing
Partially meets expectations
Satisfactory
|
1
Beginning
Does not meet expectations
Needs improvement
|
Background/ Scenario
|
Provides a comprehensive, detailed, and engaging description of the fictitious bank and its challenges. Clearly outlines the organisational structure, rich picture, and key challenges with deep insights.
|
Presents a clear and accurate description of the bank, its structure, and the scenario. Provides relevant details but with less depth or fewer insights than expected.
|
Offers a basic description of the scenario and organisational context, though key details and a thorough analysis of challenges are missing or underdeveloped.
|
Description is vague, incomplete, or inaccurate. Lacks essential elements such as a clear organisational structure, rich picture, and identification of key challenges.
|
Introduction
|
Delivers a concise, well-articulated introduction that not only explains the origins and key assumptions of SSM and socio-technical systems theory but also effectively links them to the scenario with strong justification.
|
Provides a clear overview of the methodologies with adequate historical context and relevance to the scenario. Minor areas may lack depth, but overall the introduction is sound.
|
Gives a basic introduction to SSM and socio-technical systems theory with limited context or clear linkage to the scenario. The discussion is present but not fully integrated.
|
Introduction is minimal or unclear. Contains insufficient or inaccurate information about the methodologies and does not establish clear relevance or context for the scenario.
|
Application of SSM
|
Demonstrates an insightful and thorough application of SSM. Each step is clearly detailed with appropriate use of diagrams/tables (rich picture, CATWOE, PQR). Shows deep integration of stakeholder perspectives and risk analysis.
|
Provides a clear, structured application of SSM steps with adequate detail and supportive diagrams/tables. Addresses most key components but may miss some deeper analytical insights.
|
Shows a basic understanding of SSM with some application of the steps. Diagrams/tables are minimal or incomplete, and the analysis of stakeholder perspectives or risks is superficial.
|
The application is minimal or inaccurate. Fails to effectively detail or diagram the SSM steps and lacks a clear analysis of stakeholder perspectives and associated risks.
|
Application of STS
|
Integrates socio-technical systems theory seamlessly with SSM outcomes. Provides a thorough explanation of each element, establishes strong links to the redesigned system, and presents clear, actionable evaluation criteria.
|
Clearly explains the main elements of socio-technical systems theory and applies them adequately to evaluate the system. The link to the scenario is clear, though some elements may be less detailed.
|
Provides a basic application of socio-technical systems theory with limited explanation and connection to the redesigned system. Evaluation criteria are present but not fully developed.
|
Fails to adequately apply or explain socio-technical systems theory. Lacks clear connections to the scenario or actionable evaluation criteria, resulting in a superficial analysis.
|
Conclusions
|
Offers a comprehensive, reflective conclusion that clearly identifies key risks, outlines robust risk management strategies, and effectively summarizes major insights, including a powerful statement on the main lesson learned.
|
Summarizes the key risks and outlines risk management steps clearly. The conclusion effectively captures the main insights and lessons, though some areas might be less nuanced.
|
Identifies some risks and offers basic management strategies. The conclusion is present but lacks depth, critical reflection, or a clear synthesis of the overall insights.
|
Conclusion is inadequate or incomplete. Fails to clearly identify risks, offer actionable management strategies, or reflect on the overall lessons learned from the application of the methodologies.
|