|
Assessment Categories
|
AoL
Traits
|
Needs Significant Improvement
0-39
|
Satisfactory
40-49
|
Sound
50-59
|
Good
60-69
|
Very Good
70-79
|
Exceptional
80-100
|
|
Assessment criteria and weighting
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Knowledge & Understanding (30%)
Demonstrates understanding of core supply chain management processes.
Shows awareness of how supply chains create value, respond to disruption, and balance cost, service, resilience and sustainability.
|
4.1.1
|
Limited or inaccurate knowledge of core supply chain processes; key concepts, relationships and trade-offs are misunderstood or omitted.
|
Basic knowledge of core supply chain processes, with some accurate explanation of relationships, value creation and operational trade-offs.
|
Sound knowledge of core supply chain processes, explaining relevant relationships, disruption responses and cost, service, resilience and sustainability considerations.
|
Good, well-developed knowledge of interconnected supply chain processes and how organisations balance value, disruption and competing performance priorities.
|
Very good, detailed and integrated understanding of supply chain processes, value creation, disruption and the interaction of key performance priorities.
|
Exceptional, comprehensive and insightful understanding of supply chain processes, demonstrating nuanced awareness of interdependencies, value creation and strategic trade-offs.
|
|
Cognitive & Research Skills (25%)
Demonstrates the ability to analyse and evaluate supply chain issues, develop a coherent argument or explanation, and apply relevant ideas, evidence and approaches creatively to different business contexts.
|
4.1.2
|
Analysis is limited or largely descriptive; arguments are unclear, evidence is weak, and relevant approaches are applied inaccurately.
|
Some analysis is evident, with a basic argument and use of evidence, though evaluation, creativity and application remain limited.
|
Sound analysis supports a coherent argument; relevant evidence and approaches are applied appropriately, with some evaluation and adaptation.
|
Good analysis and evaluation sustain a clear argument, using relevant evidence and adapting ideas effectively to the business context.
|
Very good, critical analysis integrates strong evidence, evaluates alternative perspectives and applies ideas creatively across different business contexts.
|
Exceptional, rigorous and insightful analysis sustains a compelling argument, critically evaluates evidence and develops highly original, well-adapted approaches.
|
|
Application of Supply Chain Skills and Practices (30%)
Applies supply chain concepts, tools and techniques to practical business situations, showing the ability to identify operational challenges and propose realistic, evidence-informed improvements.
|
1.1.2
|
Limited or inappropriate application of supply chain tools; operational challenges are poorly identified and proposed improvements are unrealistic or unsupported.
|
Basic application of relevant tools identifies some operational challenges; proposed improvements are feasible but general or weakly evidenced.
|
Sound application of appropriate tools identifies relevant operational challenges and produces practical improvements supported by suitable evidence.
|
Good application of supply chain tools supports clear diagnosis and realistic, well-justified improvements suited to the business situation.
|
Very good, confident application of appropriate tools generates insightful diagnosis and robust, evidence-informed improvements with clear practical value.
|
Exceptional, sophisticated application of supply chain tools produces highly perceptive diagnosis and innovative, feasible improvements with compelling justification.
|
|
Communication and Report Structure (10%)
Ability to communicate information, ideas and recommendations clearly and professionally through a well-structured report, using logical organisation, appropriate academic style and clear presentation.
|
2.1.1
|
Unclear and poorly structured; ideas and recommendations are difficult to follow, with weak academic style and presentation.
|
Generally understandable, but structure, academic style and presentation are inconsistent; ideas and recommendations lack clarity.
|
Clear and logically structured, communicating ideas and recommendations appropriately in a sound academic style.
|
Well-structured and professional, communicating ideas and recommendations clearly through effective academic writing and presentation.
|
Highly coherent and polished, with clear, confident communication, strong academic style and excellent presentation.
|
Exceptionally clear, compelling and professional, with seamless structure, precise academic style and outstanding presentation.
|
|
Referencing and Academic Integrity (5%)
Accurate and consistent use of academic citation and referencing conventions, with appropriate acknowledgement of sources to support ideas, evidence and arguments.
|
2.1.2
|
Sources are inadequately acknowledged, with frequent or serious citation and referencing errors.
|
Some sources are acknowledged, but citations and references are incomplete or inconsistent, with noticeable errors.
|
Relevant sources are acknowledged through generally accurate citation and referencing, with minor inconsistencies.
|
Sources are well integrated and accurately cited and referenced, with few minor errors.
|
Sources are integrated effectively to support arguments, with consistently accurate citation and referencing.
|
Sources are integrated seamlessly to strengthen arguments, with exemplary, precise and fully consistent citation and referencing.
|
