Assessment Task

HFR603BM_Assessment_2_Brief_RM Scenario Evaluation_Due Week 7 Page 1 of 7
Assessment Task
Analyse and evaluate a dataset and provide recommendations for revenue generation.
Please refer to the Instructions for details on how to complete this task.
Context
Revenue Management (RM) takes its roots in understanding, analysing and evaluating hotel data in
order to make tactical and strategic revenue-related decisions, including pricing, inventory controls,
channel and distribution management, and so forth. The RM Scenario Evaluation assessment will
provide you with the opportunity to have hands-on experience with RM data. It will help you to gain
an understanding regarding what RM is, what its main functions are and how these can be used in
hotel settings. Gaining this knowledge will assist you in becoming well versed in this
interdepartmental topic and enable you to identify its application in any hotel department. To
successfully complete this assessment, you will need to demonstrate strong research skills, as well as
critical thinking and analysis.

ASSESSMENT 2 BRIEF
Subject Code and Title HFR603BM Hotel Finance and Revenue
Assessment Revenue Management Scenario Evaluation
Individual/Group Individual
Length 1,500 words (+/- 10%)
Learning Outcomes The Subject Learning Outcomes demonstrated by successful
completion of the task below include:
a) Critically evaluate hotel, financial and industry analytics
information for improved business decision-making.
b) Recommend strategies to achieve revenue targets.
c) Critically analyse the operational requirements of revenue
management.
Submission Due by 11:55 pm AEST/AEDT Sunday end of Week 7
Weighting 40%
Total Marks 100 marks

HFR603BM_Assessment_2_Brief_RM Scenario Evaluation_Due Week 7 Page 2 of 7
Task Instructions
Please refer to the dataset handout provided in order to prepare your Revenue Management
Scenario Evaluation.
When analysing and evaluating the dataset, ensure that your evaluation shows whether the current
data is positive, negative, mixed or has no impact on the hotel’s performance. Positive evaluations
would be reflected by increases in key performance indicators (KPIs), while negative evaluations
stem from decreasing KPIs. A mixed evaluation will detail both positive changes and negative
impacts to the hotel’s performance, whereas there may be no changes in KPIs with no impact to the
hotel’s performance.
You must also provide recommendations for the hotel, based on your data analysis and evaluation,
to improve the overall hotel RM performance. Refer to your handout to know how many
recommendations are necessary, and for which aspects of the data set.
The recommended structure of the report is as follow:
Introduction – introduce the context, identify the key problem(s) and report outline.
Analysis and Evaluation – describe and explain the data set and its primary positive and
negative issues; then defend your own perspective on the scenario hotel’s performance.
Recommendations – use the SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant and TimeBound) acronym to ensure actionable recommendations.
Conclusion – summarise the scenario, the key problem(s) identified and the key
recommendation(s).
References – a minimum of eight academic articles, plus others as required, are necessary in
order to demonstrate competency in this assessment. Blogs and other unverifiable sources
will not count as references.
Appendices – to show calculations, and additional resources used in the report.
The total word count, excluding references and appendices, must be within 10% (+/-) of the
assessment word count of 1,500 words.
Referencing
It is essential that you use appropriate APA 7th style for citing and referencing research. Please see
more information on referencing in the
Academic Skills webpage.
Submission Instructions
Submit this assessment via the Assessment link in the main navigation menu in HFR603BM – Hotel
Finance & Revenue. The Learning Facilitator will provide feedback via the Grade Centre in the
Blackboard portal. Feedback can be viewed in My Grades.
Please ensure that your assessment is:
1. typed and formatted following the
Academic Writing Guide and uploaded to Blackboard by
the due date
2. submitted in electronic form as a Word-processed file to Blackboard, and

HFR603BM_Assessment_2_Brief_RM Scenario Evaluation_Due Week 7 Page 3 of 7
3. includes a TUA cover sheet attached to your paper.
Academic Integrity
All students are responsible for ensuring that all work submitted is their own and is appropriately
referenced and academically written according to the
Academic Writing Guide. Students also need
to have read and be aware of Torrens University Australia Academic Integrity Policy and Procedure
and subsequent penalties for academic misconduct. These are
viewable online.
Students also must keep a copy of all submitted material and any assessment drafts.
Special Consideration
To apply for special consideration for a modification to an assessment or exam due to unexpected or
extenuating circumstances, please consult the
Assessment Policy for Higher Education Coursework
and ELICOS
, and if applicable to your circumstance, submit a completed Application for Assessment
Special Consideration Form
to your Learning Facilitat
HFR603BM_Assessment_2_Brief_RM Scenario Evaluation_Due Week 7 Page 4 of 7
Assessment Rubric

Assessment
Attributes
Fail
(Yet to achieve
minimum standard)
0-49%
Pass
(Functional)
50-64%
Credit
(Proficient)
65-74%
Distinction
(Advanced)
75-84%
High Distinction
(Exceptional)
85-100%
Calculation (accuracy
and level of completion)
Percentage for this
criterion = 10%
Less than 50% of
calculations are
successfully completed.
Calculations steps
required in questions are
inadequate and unclear.
50-64% of calculations are
successfully completed.
Calculation steps required in
questions are adequate, but
not entirely clear.
65-75% of calculations are
successfully completed.
Calculation steps required
in questions are clear.
75 – 84% of calculations are
successfully completed.
Calculation steps required
in questions demonstrate a
clear knowledge of
formulae.
85-100% of calculations are
successfully completed.
Calculation steps required
in questions demonstrate a
clear and thorough
knowledge of formulae and
rounding.
Analysis and application
with synthesis of new
knowledge
Percentage for this
criterion = 25%
Limited to no synthesis
and analysis.
Confuses logic and
emotion. Information
taken from reliable
sources but without a
coherent analysis or
synthesis.
Demonstrated minimal
analysis and synthesis of new
knowledge.
Resembles a recall or
summary of key ideas.
Demonstrates limited ability
to interpret information and
literature.
Well-developed analysis
and synthesis of new
knowledge.
Demonstrates a capacity to
explain and apply relevant
concepts.
Questions viewpoints of
experts.
Thoroughly developed and
creative analysis and
synthesis of new
knowledge.
Well demonstrated capacity
to explain and apply
relevant concepts.
Viewpoint of experts are
subject to questioning.
Highly sophisticated and
creative analysis, synthesis
of new with existing
knowledge.
Strong application of
relevant concepts to the
argument.
Recommendations are
clearly justified based on
the analysis/synthesis.
Knowledge applied to new
situations/other cases.

HFR603BM_Assessment_2_Brief_RM Scenario Evaluation_Due Week 7 Page 5 of 7

Assessment
Attributes
Fail
(Yet to achieve
minimum standard)
0-49%
Pass
(Functional)
50-64%
Credit
(Proficient)
65-74%
Distinction
(Advanced)
75-84%
High Distinction
(Exceptional)
85-100%
Evaluation (defence of
own perspective on
positive/negative
performance of
business)
Percentage for this
criterion = 25%
Minimal to no evaluation
of RM scenario.
Limited understanding of
key concepts required to
support the scenario.
Evaluation does not
reflect expert judgement,
intellectual independence,
rigour and adaptability.
Limited synthesis and
evaluation of RM scenario.
Some use of RM concepts
and illustrations.
Often conflates/confuses
assertion of personal opinion
with information
substantiated by evidence
from the research/course
materials.
Limited/minimal reflection of
expert judgement,
intellectual independence,
rigour and adaptability.
Can synthesise and
evaluate RM scenario using
RM concepts and
illustrations, though often
not related to the topic at
hand.
Supports personal opinion
and information
substantiated by evidence
from the research/course
materials.
Can synthesise and defend
own position of the RM
scenario, using RM
concepts and illustrations,
often related to the topic at
hand.
Discriminates between
assertion of personal
opinion and information
substantiated by robust
evidence from the
research/course materials
and extended reading.
Evaluation reflects growing
judgement, intellectual
independence, rigour and
adaptability.
Can analyse, synthesise and
defend own position on RM
scenario, using RM
concepts and illustrations
relevant to the topic.
Systematically and critically
discriminates between
assertion of personal
opinion and information
substantiated by robust
evidence from the
research/course materials
and extended reading.
Exhibits intellectual
independence, rigour, good
judgement and
adaptability.
Recommendations
(application of RM
concepts)
Percentage for this
criterion = 30%
No recommendations,
unfeasible or non-viable
recommendations, or
undeveloped
recommendations.
Recommendations are under
developed and show limited
application of the data
analysis.
Recommendations are
linked to the data analysis,
but could be developed in
more depth.
Justified recommendations
linked to analysis.
Recommendations are
clearly justified based on
the analysis. Knowledge
applied to new
situations/other cases.

HFR603BM_Assessment_2_Brief_RM Scenario Evaluation_Due Week 7 Page 6 of 7

Assessment
Attributes
Fail
(Yet to achieve
minimum standard)
0-49%
Pass
(Functional)
50-64%
Credit
(Proficient)
65-74%
Distinction
(Advanced)
75-84%
High Distinction
(Exceptional)
85-100%
Effective
Communication
(Written)
Presents information.
Specialised language and
terminology are rarely or
inaccurately employed.
Meaning is repeatedly
obscured by errors in the
communication of ideas,
including errors in
structure, sequence,
spelling, grammar,
punctuation and/or the
acknowledgment of
sources.
Demonstrates
inconsistent use of good
quality, credible and
relevant resources to
support and develop
ideas.
Referencing is omitted or
does not resemble APA.
Less than eight academic
references included
Communicates in a readable
manner that largely adheres
to the given format.
Generally employs specialised
language and terminology
with accuracy.
Meaning is sometimes
difficult to follow.
Information, arguments and
evidence are structured and
sequenced in a way that is
not always clear and logical.
Some errors are evident in
spelling, grammar and/or
punctuation.
Demonstrates use of credible
and relevant resources to
support and develop ideas,
but these are not always
explicit or well developed.
Referencing resembles APA,
with frequent or repeated
errors.
Communicates in a
coherent and readable
manner that adheres to the
given format.
Accurately employs
specialised language and
terminology.
Meaning is easy to follow.
Information, arguments and
evidence are structured and
sequenced in a way that is
clear and logical.
Occasional minor errors
present in spelling,
grammar and/or
punctuation.
Demonstrates use of
credible resources to
support and develop ideas.
Referencing resembles APA,
with occasional errors.
Communicates coherently
and concisely in a manner
that adheres to the given
format.
Accurately employs a wide
range of specialised
language and terminology.
Engages audience interest.
Information, arguments and
evidence are structured and
sequenced in a way that is,
clear and persuasive.
Spelling, grammar and
punctuation are free from
errors.
Demonstrates use of good
quality, credible and
relevant resources to
support and develop
arguments and statements.
APA referencing is free
from errors.
Communicates eloquently.
Expresses meaning
coherently, concisely and
creatively within the given
format.
Discerningly selects and
precisely employs a wide
range of specialised
language and terminology.
Engages and sustains
audience’s interest.
Information, arguments
and evidence are insightful,
persuasive and expertly
presented.
Spelling, grammar and
punctuation are free from
errors.
Demonstrates use of high
quality, credible and
relevant resources to
support and develop
arguments and position
statements.

HFR603BM_Assessment_2_Brief_RM Scenario Evaluation_Due Week 7 Page 7 of 7

Assessment
Attributes
Fail
(Yet to achieve
minimum standard)
0-49%
Pass
(Functional)
50-64%
Credit
(Proficient)
65-74%
Distinction
(Advanced)
75-84%
High Distinction
(Exceptional)
85-100%
Percentage for this
criterion = 10%
APA referencing is free
from errors.