Great Service ever had. Price are genuine as compared to others. Team members are likely to help and work is good. I am your costumer now, thanks i am really happy with your service.

marking rubric part 2 25006832_1Screen Shot at 123817 AM.png https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NQa-dJs3ads the lecturer's feedback Marcus Lim Wei s3566200.docx Screen Shot at 123743 AM.png Screen Shot at 123806 AM.png

This assignment requires you to critique the frameworks used, and hence, it is also important to develop a very strong understanding of the frameworks and how they interlink. It is not about putting in a lot of frameworks into your report. It is about understanding which is the relevant framework to apply. Management assignment: How to identify and leverage the experience and knowledge that already resides within the organisation to improve organisation effectiveness About the Blood Service The Blood Service is a division of the Australian Red Cross and is responsible for the provision of blood products and related services to the Australian community. The Blood Service is a not-for-profit organisation that is funded primarily by the Australian Government and state/territory governments to provide fresh blood components and plasma for fractionation - and it is the only provider of these components in Australia

Overall, the analysis did not present insights into the complexities of this industry. It also did not present an understanding of how external factors (PESTEL and P5) are inter-linked, nor how external factors impact on the internal capabilities (or lack thereof) of the organisation. This resulted in a superficial management challenge, which would likely the quality of recommendations required for the subsequent assignments. A deeper level of thought and analysis is required. Quality of research needs to be much strengthened, to minimise the speculative nature of the analysis and to achieve a higher quality of understanding and analysis. Research should be broadened accordingly, to support a higher quality of understanding and analysis.

Presents factual information from some relevant sources representing limited points of view/approaches. Lack of analysis or critical appreciation of knowledge sources. Little evidence of knowledge of the relevant body of knowledge to make a persuasive case. Failure to review critically, analyse, consolidate and combine knowledge and draw relevant conclusions. Presents information from irrelevant sources or in very insufficient quantity.

Breadth and depth of research (15%) Provides an in-depth synthesis of information from relevant sources representing various points of view / approaches. Demonstrated ability to critically review, analyse, synthesise, and apply theoretical and technical body of knowledge in a broad range of areas and diverse contexts perhaps with some synthesis. Presents information from relevant sources representing various points of view / approaches. Demonstrates some analysis of those views/approaches.

Demonstrates an ability in identifying a problem statement or related contextual factors. Important aspects of problem not addressed. Depth of reading insufficient to award a credit grade. Problem statement may be factual and descriptive rather than analytical. Develops a problem statement but lacks academic rigour, with material that is incomplete or irrelevant. Little evidence of knowledge of the relevant body of knowledge to make a persuasive case. Unable to or poorly demonstrates an ability to write a problem statement or identify important contextual factors. Work may have failed for one or more of the following: non- submission, academic misconduct, answering a different question from the one asked, poor or incoherent vocabulary, no evidence of correct scholarly referencing.

Marking Rubric High Distinction 80%- 100% Distinction 70%-79% Credit 600/0-69% Pass 50%-59% Fail 30%-49% Serious Fail <30% Demonstrates the ability to construct a clear and insightful problem statement with evidence of all relevant contextual factors. Identifies potentially significant yet previously less-explored aspects of the issue(s). Highly original or insightful work. All elements of the theoretical frameworks are skilfully developed. Appropriate methodology or theoretical frameworks may be synthesised from across disciplines or from relevant sub-disciplines. Identifies flaws in published work. Identifies tools, models, theories from a range of management disciplines. Demonstrates a comprehensive knowledge of the subject. Demonstrates the ability to construct a problem statement with evidence of most relevant contextual factors considered and analysed. Appropriately addresses most relevant aspects of the issue. Demonstrates the ability to construct a problem statement with evidence of most relevant contextual factors.