Task 2 Report
You will need to use lecture / workshop materials and wider reading to answer the following questions. Your answer should be c2000 words. You must use the Harvard referencing system to cite your sources, and include a list of references at the end.
Many devices, such as smart phones, central heating controllers, washing machines and wearable devices can now connect to the Internet (and each other). This is known as the Internet of Things (IoT). According to Gartner (http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/2970017), there will be 4.9 billion connected things in 2015, and 25 billion by 2020. One organisation that makes use of the IoT is the American multinational conglomerate General Electric (GE).
With specific reference to the case study organisation and the industry concerned, explain what is meant by the Internet of Things, describe how they make use of the IoT, and discuss the issues that a CIO would need to consider before making a decision to move in this direction. Your answer should include discussion of the role typically played by a CIO as well as the business strategies underpinning such a move, and a critical appraisal of the maturity of the tools and techniques involved.
Marking criteria
Levels of Achievement
Criteria Needs work Competent Proficient
Understanding 0 to 5 marks
There is some understanding of the IoT 6 to 10 marks
There is sound understanding of the IoT 11 to 13 marks
There is a clear and concise account of the IoT, which has been synthesized well with case study discussion
Application
Was the theory applied correctly and effectively?
0 to 5 marks
There is little or no research into the case study organization. 6 to 10 marks
Your discussion could have been more closely related to the case study organization. 11 to 13 marks
There is clear evidence of extensive research into the case study organization which has been synthesized well with the IoT discussion
Relevant theory and frameworks.
Have you selected an appropriate set of theoretical frameworks and/or method(s)? Are they appropriate?
E.g. Reference to Strategy triangle/management models; Porter’s Generic Strategies Framework (and its variants); Hyper competition and the New 7-S’s framework (D’Aveni); Co-opetition (Brandenburg and Nalebuff) 0 to 5 marks
There is little or no attempt to relate this to the theory of the module. 6 to 10 marks
There is some attempt to relate this to the theory of the module, but this could have been covered in more detail, or more closely integrated into your discussion. 11 to 13 marks
There is a well synthesized, clear and concise account of the topic, and how this relates to the theory of the module, showing clear understanding of both the subject area and the strategic frameworks.
Scholarship
Have you provided appropriate discussion in the context of relevant literature? 0 to 5 marks
There has been little or no attempt to cite in the body of the work, or too much of a dependence on direct quotations. There is little evidence of wider research; the list of references consists mainly of websites. The reference list may be incomplete, or references are not in Harvard format. 6 to 10 marks
There has been some attempt to reference in the body of the guide either by citation or acknowledging the sources of direct quotations, although this may be incomplete or not in Harvard format. You have used a number of resources, although there may be too much of a dependence on internet sources, some of which may not be reliable. The reference lists reflects the citations and quotations, although there may be some errors or omissions. 11 to 14 marks
Sources have been acknowledged with correct use of citations and acknowledgement of direct quotation. The reference list reflects the citations and is in Harvard format. You have used a wide range of appropriate resources, including books and journals as well as relevant websites.
Argument
Were appropriate conclusions drawn and recommendations made? 0 to 5 marks
There may be evidence of research and some understanding of the subject area. However, there is little or no introduction and/or conclusion, and the report lacks structure and does not flow well. 6 to 10 marks
Sound understanding of the subject area. Some attempt has been made to structure the report appropriately, although occasionally ideas fail to make sense together. 11 to 14 marks
Good understanding of the subject area. The report contains a clear introduction and conclusion. The body of the report presents the arguments clearly and logically, showing a thoughtful and in depth analysis of the topic. There is good evidence of understanding. You have analysed your findings and these have been synthesised to produce a clear, well-structured report.
Grade descriptors
In addition to the assessment criteria above the following table may assist you in understanding how we arrive at your final mark. Indeed your final mark should agree with the following grade descriptors, but note that the assessment criteria are the main means of assessment.
Mark Descriptor
0-39% Limited conceptual understanding with possible structural deficiencies. Restricted use of theory within module. Inappropriate argument leading to unreliable and invalid conclusions/recommendations
40-49% Some confusion in purpose & aims of evaluation. Some overall structure and conceptual understanding. Fair use of theory but arguments sometimes irrelevant, illogical or with unsupported assertions.
50-59% Demonstrates a limited but accurate level of understanding presented in a mostly descriptive manner. The answer contains relevant interpretation and critical understanding especially at the upper end of the marking range.
60-69% Demonstrates accurate knowledge and understanding of the subject presented in a coherent manner. The answer contains evidence of application and interpretation. At the upper end there is evidence of thoughtful and measured critical evaluation.
70-79% Demonstrates a clear, comprehensively researched understanding of relevant material with some element of critical evaluation. Shows initiative in approach and rigour in the handling of information. Demonstrates originality of thought together with interpretation and application to the relevant sector
80% or above The answer is analytical and critical. The assignment demonstrates scholarship through a depth of insight and understanding of relevant material, which is logically structured, accurate and well referenced. Originality of thought and application is evident.
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|