Criteria and Weighting

To obtain 70% or above:

To obtain 60% or above:

To obtain 55 – 59%:

To obtain 50% - 54%:

To obtain a Fail grade of between 49 - 40 %:-

To obtain a substantial fail of between 39 - 0%:-

A critical literature review on Information Governance and Information Security (20%)

An excellent review, demonstrating independent research (relevant and recent sources, from academic as well as practitioner sources) and critical thinking (engaging with sources rather than taking them at face value; discussing their limitations, strengths and weaknesses)

A good review that demonstrates some independent research and critical engagement with sources.

A good review, showing independent research, although sources are not always trustworthy, are taken at face value, or are outdated.

A reasonably good review, showing little independent research, although sources are not always trustworthy, are taken at face value, or are outdated.

A poor review, showing little or no evidence of independent research and critical thinking.

A very poor review, with little or no sources, and/or little or no critical engagement with said sources.

Critically reflect on the senior manager`s role and responsibility in leading information governance in P&G case study (15%)

An excellent reflection, very well written, making full use of the information in the case study as well as relevant literature. Use of theoretical frameworks (such as “five rights”, CIA, etc.) to support the analysis of the roles and responsibilities of senior leadership. Technical issues, cultural issues, security and legal implications of data location, the importance of the “one truth” for decision making are all considered, and more. Coherent and fully justified conclusions.

A good reflection, well written, making good use of the information in the case study as well as relevant literature for the topic, but more integration of theoretical frameworks in practice would be needed.

A good reflection, making some use of existing theoretical frameworks to build and support the argument, which may sometimes lack in clarity. Few issues may be weakly explored.

A reasonably good reflection, making some use of existing theoretical frameworks to build and support the argument, which may sometimes lack in clarity.

Some issues may be weakly explored.

A poor written analysis, with limited support from existing theoretical frameworks, and many of the issues are ignored.

A very poor analysis, with little if any link between theory and practice, or not at all attempted.

Critical appraisal of the use of information systems in an organisation (20%)

An excellent analysis of inner- facing and outer-facing social media; of corporate infrastructure, including cloud services in use, their type, advantages and disadvantages for the organisation; operations management; data collection and use for adding added value to the organisation’s operations are all considered to a high level of excellence. The organisation’s particular context is taken into account in each and every aspect.

A good analysis of a chosen organisation, that discusses some of the most obvious aspects of the use of information systems, with good consideration for the organisation’s context

A reasonably good analysis that takes into account a specific organisation and discusses most of the relevant aspects, but misses some of the obvious ones. The organisation’s context may be only partially taken into account in the analysis.

A sufficient analysis that takes into account a specific organisation and discusses some of the relevant aspects, but misses many of the obvious ones. The organisation’s context may be only partially taken into account in the analysis.

The analysis is limited and does not take into account the context of an organisation or does so only very poorly. Many if not all of the aspects of information systems’ use are ignored.

Little evidence of understanding of the issues surrounding information systems and their use in an organisation.

Critical evaluation of possible improvements to the organisation’s use of information systems (15%)

An excellent proposal for possible improvements to the organisation’s use of IMS, in terms of infrastructure, use of the cloud, use of data, use of social media (internally and externally), with a focus on staff development, communication, decision making. All aspects fully discussed and properly supported by relevant theoretical frameworks and the previous analysis.

A good proposal for possible improvements to the organisation’s use of IMS, with few areas that needed more attention and stronger support from the previous analysis or existing literature

A reasonably good proposal for possible improvements to the organisation’s use of IMS, with some areas that needed more attention and stronger support from the previous analysis or existing literature.

A rather limited proposal for possible improvements to the organisation’s use of IMS, with many areas that needed more attention and stronger support from the previous analysis or existing literature.

A poor proposal for possible improvements to the organisation’s use of IMS, with limited coverage of many of the aspects, and stronger support from the previous analysis or existing literature was needed.

Little evidence of understanding of the issues surrounding information systems and the way they can be used to improve aspects of organisational life.

Critical analysis of the importance of security in information management in a case study organisation (15%)

An excellent discussion of the risk landscape around information management in general and in the chosen organisation; types of risks (internal, external, malicious, unintended, natural disasters) and possible impact (operation, legal, financial) and mitigation. Fully supported by existing literature and great evidence of a logically developed conceptual framework.

A good discussion of the risk landscape around information management, which covers most aspects. Stronger support from existing literature may have been needed.

A reasonably good discussion of the risk landscape around information management, which covers most aspects but misses a few. Stronger integration of theory and practice was needed.

A sufficiently good discussion of the risk landscape around information management, which covers some of the relevant aspects but misses a large part. Much stronger integration of theory and practice was needed.

The analysis is limited and only touches on a few of the aspects, with little evidence of a logically developed conceptual framework.

No real analysis, with no logical development and little or no integration of theory and practice.

Referencing and presentation (15%)

Excellent Harvard referencing throughout the paper and an excellent bibliography/references list. The paper itself is presented in a clear, logical way, and would be appropriate for peer-review publication.

Very minor Harvard referencing errors throughout the paper and bibliography. The paper itself is presented with some style

Minor Harvard referencing issues throughout the paper and bibliography which does not detract from the academic level of the work. The paper itself is presented clearly and coherently

Harvard Referencing issues throughout the paper and bibliography detract from the academic level of study and/or the spelling and grammar errors cause the whole to be poorly presented.

Very poor Harvard referencing throughout the paper and bibliography and/or a poorly constructed paper.

Either no Harvard referencing and/or spelling and grammar detracts from the academic level required. The paper is not adequate for Master level work. UCBS7040 Information Management Assessment