Business Decision Analytics

ASSESSMENT 1 BRIEF
Subject Code and Title MGT602 Business Decision Analytics
Assessment Decision Style Analysis Reflective report
Individual/Group Individual
Length Up to 1500 words
Learning Outcomes a) Select and evaluate the usefulness of a range of decision making
tools and reflect on your decision-making styles and contrast
with other styles to determine the respective levels of
rationality and intuition utilised
b) Compare, contrast and critically evaluate sources of data as
influences for decision-making in a range of business contexts
Submission For regular class (12 Weeks Duration):
By 11:59 pm AEST/AEDT Sunday of Module 2.2 (week 4)
For intensive class (6 Weeks Duration):
Part A:
By 11:59 pm AEST/AEDT Sunday of Module 2.2 (week 2)
Weighting 20%
Total Marks 20 marks

Context:
Fast changing workplaces call for greater flexibility in the ways individuals and work teams make and
implement decisions. Alongside the increasing rate of change are the demands for better decision
making through understanding and mitigating personal preferences and biases.
This assessment has been designed to:
Appraise your ability to research academic literature on decision making. You are expected
to utilise the literature provided in Modules 1 and 2 as a foundation that guides your
further academic research.
Select and evaluate the usefulness of a range of decision-making tools and reflect on levels of
rationality and intuition utilised during the decision-making process.
Compare, contrast and critically evaluate sources of data as influences in the decision-making
context
Identify the relevant sources of influence and limitations in your decision-decision making process
MGT602 Assessment 1 writing guidelines:
This assessment draws on learning activities and resources from Modules 1 and 2. It is designed for you
to engage in the decision-making process and then reflectively analyse your decision-making process
using only theories and concepts from the Business Decision Analytics course (MGT602).
You should include in your reflective report:
The decision-making problem detailed by your learning facilitator
Analysis of your decision-making preferences (see activity Module 1)
Analysis and influence of your personality traits and the impact on your decision-making
Details of the sources of data collected during the decision-making process and how this data
was evaluated/analysed
Analysis of the decision-making process using any of the models discussed in Modules 1 and 2
plus any of your further relevant readings
Analysis of written feedback from at least 2 other people on your decision-making process in the
topic nominated by your Learning Facilitator
Visual interpretation of data / trends/ patterns
As a reflective analysis you will present your analysis in the first person.
Submission format
Cover Sheet: Every assessment must have a Torrens University Coversheet. (The Assignment Cover
Sheet found in:
https://www.torrens.edu.au/policies-and-forms)
1. Introduction: 100 words maximum. The introduction will present the reader with a clear and
concise understanding of the following: 1. What is the submission about; 2. What theories will be
used; 3 Your concise conclusion; and 4 The structure of the submission
2. Analysis and evaluation: 1300 words maximum. In this section you will analyse and evaluate your
decision-making process using selected theories and concepts from the various Modules offered
in Blackboard for this subject.
You must include any blind spots or biases that you have identified
in making this evaluative decision based on your research and formal feedback from others
.
3. Conclusion: 100 words maximum. In this section you will provide a concise summation of your
analysis and conclusion(s).
4. References: A minimum of 4 academic references are required from seminal sources and books.
Referencing must be APA style. For referencing information refer to:
http://library.laureate.net.au/research_skills/referencing
5. Appendix: If required.
6. NOTE: This submission is to be presented as a report. Any tables prepared must be identified
and discussed in the text/body and included in an appendix.

MGT602 Assessment 1 Submission Process
Please make sure to submit your MGT602 Assessment 1 via Blackboard and the Assessments Tab by
End of Module 2.2 (Sunday of 4th teaching session AEST/AEDT).
There is NO need to insert Table of Contents and Executive Summary.
Please make sure to submit ONE Microsoft WORD Document (.doc OR .docx). PDF SUBMISSIONS
WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED
.
Please make sure to insert page numbers.
The Assignment Cover Sheet is available at (https://www.torrens.edu.au/policies-and-forms) and
must be inserted at the beginning of the assessment document.
You may identify each section with the headings of. 1. Introduction, 2. Analysis and Evaluation, 3.
Conclusion, 4. References, 5 Appendix).
The Cover Sheet and References are not included in the word count. Nor is the appendix
Only APA style is used for citing and referencing research. More information on referencing here
http://library.laureate.net.au/research_skills/referencing
Please make sure to review the provided marking rubric at the end of this document for your
information.
Notes to Learning Facilitator and student:
Each student needs to select one topic from a range that will be provided by the Learning Facilitator in
week 2
. It is the student’s responsibility to read the options provided and make an appropriate choice
based on interest or prior knowledge.
The student is required to assume the role of undertaking this decision for themselves and evaluate
the decision based on the criteria listed above (eg blind spots, biases, decision models utilized etc) and
any further relevant sources gained from Modules 1 and 2 on Blackboard.

Grading Rubric Assessment 1. Weighting 20%

Assessment Criteria Fail (Unacceptable)
0-49%
Pass (Functional)
50-64%
Credit (Proficient)
65-74%
Distinction (Advanced) 75 –
84%
High Distinction (Exceptional)
85-100%
1. Reflect on a range of
personal daily decision
styles and one major
decision to analyse and
evaluate sources of data,
decision-making style and
decision-making tools.
(25% -5/20)
Little or no authentic
personal reflection on
daily decision style or
major decision. No, or
limited analysis or
evaluation of sources of
data input, decision
making styles and tools.
Some personal reflection
on daily decision-making
style and major decision
making is evident, with
reference to at least two
sources of data, decision
making styles and tools.
A clearly authentic
personal reflection on
daily decision-making style
and major decision-making
is evident, with clear
analysis and evaluation of
at least two sources of
data, decision-making
styles and tools.
Comprehensive reflection
on daily decision-making
style and major decision
making is evident, with
clear analysis and
evaluation of at least three
sources of data, decision
making styles and tools.
Comprehensive and
sophisticated reflection on
daily decision-making style
and major decision-making is
evident, with explicit analysis
and evaluation of multiple
sources of data, decision
making styles and tools.
2. Compare and contrast
with other decision
making styles and
processes to identify bias
and blind spots (25% –
5/20)
Little or no evidence of
discussions and feedback
from others about bias
and blind spots or
comparison with other
decision-making styles
Some evidence of
discussion with at least
two other people and
comparative analysis of
decision-making styles and
the implication of bias and
blind spots for own
decision-making.
Clear evidence of
discussion with at least
two other people and
comparative analysis of
decision-making styles and
the implication of bias and
blind spots for own
decision-making.
Comprehensive evidence
of discussion with at least
three other people and
comparative analysis of
decision-making styles and
the implication of bias and
blind spots for own
decision-making
Sophisticated analysis and
comparison of decision
making styles and the
implication of bias and blind
spots for decision making.
Feedback from at least three
other people is discussed with
recommendations to enhance
own decision-making
3.Prepare a business style
report with clear headings
and visual interpretation
and presentation of data
trends/ patterns (25%- 10
marks)
Report lacks logical
coherence and clear
structure Limited data
analysis and no visual
representation of data.
Report has basic logical
flow and structure. Basic
concepts and analysis are
explained Attempts basic
visual representation of
data
Report has a clear logical
flow and structure. Clear
expression of concepts and
analysis. Adequate visual
representation of d
Report has a strong logical
flow and structure.
Accurate Executive
Summary. Conclusion
accurately captures key
learning. Clear visual
representation of data
trends/ patterns
Excellent logic and structure.
Concise, accurate Executive
Summary Conclusion
accurately captures deep
learning and insights. Creative
and engaging visual
representation of data trends/
patterns.
4.Support your argument
with relevant
contemporary literature
including major resources
from within the relevant
subject modules. (25%- 10
marks)
No, or few references from
within subject learning
resources modules 1-2
Many errors in text
citations and reference list
according to APA
referencing guidelines
Makes some attempt to
use relevant references
from within subject
learning resources
modules 1-2. Several
major and minor errors in
text citations and
reference list according to
APA referencing
guidelines.
References support an
adequate argument and
application of major
concepts from within
subject learning resources
modules 1-2. Several
minor errors in text
citations and reference list
according to APA
referencing guidelines.
References support a
mostly comprehensive
argument and application
of major concepts from
within subject learning
resources modules 1-2.
Strong level of accuracy of
in-text citations and
reference list according to
APA style guidelines.
Sophisticated references
support comprehensive
argument and application of
major concepts from within
subject learning resources
modules 1-2 and beyond. High
level of accuracy of in-text
citations and reference list
according to APA style
guidelines.