School of Business

BUSM7014 Compliance Management

Quarter 1 2025
 Western Sydney University acknowledges the peoples of the Darug, Dharawal, Eora and Wiradjuri nations. We also
acknowledge that the teaching and learning currently delivered across our campuses is a continuance of the teaching
and learning that has occurred on these lands for tens of thousands of years.

Subject Details

Subject Code: BUSM7014

Subject Name: Compliance Management
Credit Points: 10
Subject Level: 7
Assumed Knowledge: Not Applicable

Note: Students with any problems, concerns or doubts should discuss those with the Subject Coordinator as early as they can.

Subject Coordinator

Name: Assoc. Prof. Premaratne Samaranayake

Phone: 9685 9457
Location: Parramatta City Campus
Email: [email protected]
Consultation Arrangement:
Consultation arrangements: Please liaise directly with the academic teaching this subject regarding appropriate
consultation times. It is usually best to make contact with these staff via email

Teaching Team

Name: Adjunct Professor Rama K. Ramanathan

Phone: 0438268895
Location: Parramatta City Campus
Email: [email protected]
Consultation Arrangement:
Consultation arrangements: Please liaise directly with the academic teaching this subject regarding appropriate
consultation times. It is usually best to make contact with these staff via email.

Edition: Quarter 1 2025

Copyright ©2025 University Western Sydney trading as Western Sydney University ABN 53 014 069 881 CRICOS Provider No: 00917K No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means,
electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without the prior written permission from the Dean of the School. Copyright for acknowledged materials reproduced
herein is retained by the copyright holder. All readings in this publication are copied under licence in accordance with Part VB of the Copyright Act 1968.
Director Postgraduate Education

Name: Dr Laurel Jackson

Phone: 9685 9197
Location: Parramatta City Campus
Email: [email protected]

Administrative Support

Name: Sydney Graduate School of Management (SGSM) Client Services

Phone: 9685 9801
Location: Parramatta City Campus
Email: [email protected]

Liaison Librarian

Name: Paul Jewell

Phone: 9685 9358
Location: Parramatta City Campus
Email: [email protected]
Contents
1 About Compliance Management 2
1.1 An Introduction to this Subject . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.2 What is Expected of You . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.3 Changes to Subject as a Result of Past Student Feedback . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

2 Learning and Teaching Activities 4

3 Assessment Information 7
3.1 Subject Learning Outcomes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.2 Assessment Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.2.1 Critical review of Module 1 (Quality Systems) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.2.2 Critical Review of Module 2 (Risk Management) or Module 3 (Performance Measurement) . . 14
3.2.3 Final Examination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

4 Readings and Resources 21

4.1 Essential Readings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
4.2 Recommended Readings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
4.3 Other Teaching and Learning Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

5 Key Teaching and Learning Policies 23

1
1 About Compliance Management

1.1 An Introduction to this Subject

This subject comprises three modules that focus on quality management, risk management, and performance
measurement and benchmarking. The quality systems module explores quality management principles, systems,
and frameworks, and the role that quality management plays in creating customer value, improving competitiveness
and enhancing organisational effectiveness. The risk management module examines the important risks that need to
be managed by businesses, especially in a global business setting, and introduces common frameworks that can be used
to develop risk management strategies. The performance measurement and benchmarking module elaborates upon
the evolution of performance measurement frameworks and introduces approaches that can be used by businesses to
assess the status of their business processes and enhance performance through benchmarking. It will draw upon the
concepts and theories covered in the quality and risk management modules. All three modules incorporate aspects
related to economic, social and environmental responsibility. Students are required to study all three modules.

1.2 What is Expected of You

Study Load

A student is expected to study an hour per credit point a week. For example a 10 credit point subject would require
10 hours of study per week. This time includes the time spent within classes during lectures, tutorials or practicals.

Note for Summer Terms: As Summer subjects deliver the same content and classes over a shorter period of time,
the subjects are run in a more intensive mode. Regardless of the delivery mode, the study hours for each subject in
Summer will be around 30 hours.

Attendance

It is strongly recommended that students attend all scheduled learning activities to support their learning.

Approach to Learning

It is recommended that students attend all scheduled classes and actively participate in class activities in order to
succeed in this subject. Students are expected to take an approach that archives the best learning experience, using
thorough understanding and making sense of what they are learning. As part of the learning approach, their learning
strategies need to focus on developing their own understanding, relate ideas together to make connection with real-
world experience, explore ideas with others from different perspectives and set learning effort for achieving the learning
outcomes.

Online Learning Requirements

Subject materials will be made available on the subject’s vUWS (E-Learning) site (https://vuws.westernsydney.edu.
au/). You are expected to consult vUWS at least twice a week, as all subject announcements will be made via vUWS.
Teaching and learning materials will be regularly updated and posted online by the teaching team.

2
Special Requirements

Essential Equipment:
Not Applicable
Legislative Pre-Requisites:
Not Applicable

1.3 Changes to Subject as a Result of Past Student Feedback

The University values student feedback in order to improve the quality of its educational programs. The feedback
provided helps us improve teaching methods and subjects of study. The survey subjects results inform subject content
and design, Subject Outlines, teaching methods, assessment processes and teaching materials.

You are welcome to provide feedback that is related to the teaching of this subject. At the end of the semester
you will be given the opportunity to complete a Student Feedback on Subject questionnaire to assess the subject.
If requested by your subject coordinator, you may also have the opportunity to complete a Student Feedback on
Teaching (SFT) questionnaire to provide feedback for individual teaching staff.

As a result of student feedback, the following changes and improvements to this Subject have recently been made:

– There have been no recent changes made to the subject on the basis of student feedback.

3
 2 Learning and Teaching Activities

Teaching Topic Preparation Assessment Due

Weeks
Week 1 Topic: Overview of the subject - the three The subject outline and learning guide.
06-01-2025 modules (including the final exam). Lecture/discussion.

Topics for discussion: - Quality management - Risk

management Performance measurement
Week 2 Topic: Quality management module: Quality in Class/group discussion. Please prepare ahead: -
13-01-2025 the business environment. Reading 1: Reading 1 - Reading 2 Lecture: Important Quality
Weckenmann, A. Akkasoglu. G, & Werner, T 2015, Philosophies and Frameworks
’Quality management - history and trends’, The
TQM Journal, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 281-293.
Reading 2: Zairi, M 2013, ’The TQM legacy -
Gurus’ contributions and theoretical impact’, The
TQM Journal, vol.25, no. 6, pp. 659-676.
Week 3 Topic: Risk management module: Understanding Class/group discussion. Please prepare ahead: -
20-01-2025 risk. Reading 1 - Reading 2 Lecture: Managing Risk - An
Reading 1: Engemann, KJ 2019,’Emerging Overview
developments in organizational risk,’ Continuity &
4

Resilience Review, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 26-35.

Reading 2: van Hoek, R 2020, ’Research
opportunities for a more resilientpost-COVID-19
supply chain - closing the gap between research
findings and industry practice’, International Journal
of Operations & Production Management, vol. 40,
no. 4, pp. 341-355
Week 4 Topic: Performance measurement module: Class/group discussion. Please prepare ahead: -
27-01-2025 Performance measurement evolution. Reading 1 - Reading 2 Lecture: Operational
Reading 1: Perkins, M,Grey, A & Remmers, H Requirements for Effective Measurement Systems
2014, ’What do we really mean by ”Balanced
Scorecard”?’, International Journal of Productivity
and Performance Management, vol. 63 no. 2, pp.
148 - 169.
Reading 2: Oyewo, B, Moses, O & Erin, O 2022,
’Balanced scorecard usage and organizational
effectiveness: evidence from manufacturing sector’,
Measuring Business Excellence, vol. 26, no. 4, pp.
558-582.
 Teaching Topic Preparation Assessment Due
Weeks
Week 5 Topic: Quality management module: Quality Class/group discussion. Please prepare ahead: -
03-02-2025 frameworks. Reading 1 - Reading 2 Lectures: The ISO 9000
Reading 1: Chatzoglou, P &Chatzoudes, D 2015, Family of Standards
’The impact of ISO 9000 certification on firms’
financial performance’, International Journal of
Operations & Production Management,vol. 35 no.
1, pp. 145-174.
Reading 2: Tickle, M, Mann, R & Adebanjo, D
2016, ’Deploying business excellence- success
factors for high performance’, International Journal
of Quality &Reliability Management, vol. 33 no. 2,
pp. 197-230.
Week 6 Topic: Risk management module: Operational Class/group discussion. Please prepare ahead: - - Critical review of Module 1 (Quality Systems)
10-02-2025 risk. Reading 1 - Reading 2 Lecture: ISO 31000 Risk
Reading 1: Kumar,S, Kwong, A & Misra, C 2009, Management Standards
’Risk mitigation in offshoring business operations’,
Journal of Manufacturing Technology
Management,vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 442-459.
Reading 2: Free, C & Hecimovic, A 2021, ’Global
supply chains after COVID-19:the end of the road
5

for neoliberal globalisation?’, Accounting, Auditing

&Accountability Journal, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 58-84.
Week 7 Topic: Performance measurement module: Class/group discussion. Please prepare ahead: -
17-02-2025 Performance measurement system design. Reading 1 - Reading 2 Lecture: The Balanced
Reading 1: Zahoor, A & Sahaf, MA Scorecard and the Performance Prism
2018,’Investigating causal linkages in the balanced
scorecard: an Indian perspective,’ International
Journal of Bank Marketing, vol. 36, no. 1,
pp.184-2074.
Reading 2: Ravelomanantsoa, MS, Ducq, Y &
Vallespir, B 2019, ’A state of the art and
comparison of approaches for performance
measurement systems definition and design’,
International Journal of Production Research, vol.
57, No.15-16, pp.5026-5046.
 Teaching Topic Preparation Assessment Due
Weeks
Week 8 Topic: Performance measurement module: Class/group discussion. Please prepare ahead: - - Critical Review of Module 2 (Risk Management)
24-02-2025 Benchmarking. Reading 1 - Reading 2 Lecture: The Benchmarking or Module 3 (Performance Measurement)
Reading 1: Panwar, A, Nepal, B, Jain R & Yadav, Process
OP 2013, ’Implementation of benchmarking
concepts in Indian automobile industry - an
empirical study’, Benchmarking: An International
Journal, vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 777-804.
Reading 2: Amaral, P & Sousa, R 2009, ’Barriers to
internal benchmarking initiatives: an empirical
investigation,’ Benchmarking: An International
Journal, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 523-542.
Week 9 Topic: Quality management module: Customer Class/group discussion. Please prepare ahead: -
03-03-2025 focus. Reading 1 - Reading 2 Lecture: Focusing on
Reading 1: Nuyken, M, Zilbershtein, D &Rauf, A Customers
2022, ’Generation Z’s perspective on restaurant
service quality’,Research in Hospitality
Management, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 309-318.
Reading 2: Gruber, T, Szmigin, I & Voss, R 2009,
’Handling customer complaints effectively’,
Managing Service Quality, vol. 19, no. 6, pp.
6

636-656.
Week 10 Topic: Risk management module: Risk Class/group discussion. Please prepare ahead: -
10-03-2025 assessment. Reading 1 - Reading 2 General review and guidelines
Reading 1: Davis, CR 2002, ’Calculated risk: a for exam preparation.
framework for evaluating product development’,
Sloan Management Review, vol. 43, no. 4, pp.
71-77.
Reading 2: Ellengaard, C 2008, ’Supply risk
management in a small company perspective’,
Supply Chain Management, vol. 13, no. 6, pp.
425-434. Complete SFU survey in class.
Week 11 - Final Examination
17-03-2025

The above timetable should be used as a guide only, as it is subject to change. Students will be advised of any changes as they become known on the Subject’s vUWS site.
3 Assessment Information

3.1 Subject Learning Outcomes

Outcome
The School of Business is an AACSB (Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business)
accredited School. Accreditation results from an extensive self-review and an international peer
evaluation against rigorous criteria and standards of quality academic and professional excellence.
The process is one of continuous improvement and includes ongoing assessment of whether learning
activities and resources are well aligned to program goals and learning outcomes. Assurance of
learning (AoL) forms part of the accreditation standards for AACSB. Information regarding the subjects
that are involved in the AoL process for your program can be found on the following webpage
https://www.westernsydney.edu.au/schools/sobus/assurance_of_learning
1 Explain the features of compliance management within a business setting
Recommend alternate approaches to ensuring quality, risk, and performance management compliance in
2
organisations
3 Assess the applicability of various compliance elements in business
Apply economic, social and environmental responsibility decision-making frameworks in the context of
4
compliance management

3.2 Assessment Summary

The assessment items in this subject are designed to enable you to demonstrate that you have achieved the subject
learning outcomes. Completion and submission of all assessment items which have been designated as mandatory or
compulsory is essential to receive a passing grade.

To pass this subject you must:

Complete all assessment items. Achieve an overall mark of at least 50 per cent. Achieve a satisfactory mark of 45
per cent (18 out of 40) in the final examination.

Item Weight Due Date SLOs Assessed Mandatory Threshold

Critical review of 30% Session 6 1, 2, 3, 4 Yes No
Module 1 (Quality
Systems)
Critical Review of 30% Session 8 1, 2, 3 Yes No
Module 2 (Risk
Management) or
Module 3 (Performance
Measurement)
Final Examination 40% Examination during exam 1, 3, 4 Yes Yes
period.

Feedback on Assessment

Feedback is an important part of the learning process that can improve your progress towards achieving the learning
outcomes. Feedback is any written or spoken response made in relation to academic work such as an assessment

7
task, a performance or product. It can be given to you by a teacher, an external assessor or student peer, and may
be given individually or to a group of students. As a Western Sydney University student, it is your responsibility to
seek out and act on feedback that is provided to you as a resource to further your learning.

Note: Before you receive your results for each piece of assessment they may be moderated. Moderation is a process
whereby the subject coordinator regulates the marking of individual markers to achieve consistency in the application
of subject objectives, performance standards and marking criteria. You should note that, consistent with the Criteria
and Standards Based Assessment policy, the final marks for the cohort may be also adjusted if marks are very high
or low or there are inconsistencies between teams. Marks for an individual piece of assessment will not be changed
after you have your moderated results. Note: It is required that students attempt all available assessment elements.
An automatic Fail Non - Submission grade will be awarded if any assessment task is not submitted/completed as per
the details specified.

Academic Integrity and Student Misconduct Rule

Western cares about your success as a student and in your future career. Studying with academic integrity safeguards
your professional reputation and your degree. All Western students must:

– be familiar with the policies listed below;

– apply principles of academic integrity;
– act honestly and ethically in producing all academic work and assessment tasks; and
– submit work that is their own and acknowledge any sources used in their work.

Each time you submit an assessment, you will declare that you have completed it individually, unless it is a group
assignment. In the case of a group assignment, each group member should be ready to document their individual
contribution if needed.

The Student Misconduct Rule applies to all students of Western Sydney University including Western Sydney
University programs taught by other education providers. You must not engage in academic, research or general
misconduct as defined in the Rule or you may be subject to sanctions. The University considers submitting falsified
documentation in support of requests to redo, resit or extend submissions, including sitting of deferred examinations,
as instances of general misconduct.

More information is available in the Academic Integrity Guidelines. It is your responsibility to apply these principles
to all work you submit to the University.

Disruption to Studies and Requests for Extensions

Western recognises that there may be times when things outside of your control impact your ability to complete your
studies.

You can complete the ”Request an extension or apply for a Disruption to Studies Provision” to request that you are:

– granted an extension,
– excused from a compulsory teaching activity,
– provided an alternate assessment such as a supplementary, or
– awarded another Disruption to Studies Provision.

Before you fill in the form, you should:

– Compile any documentary evidence that you have which demonstrates that you have been impacted by an
event outside of your control.
– The Supporting Documentation website outlines the type of documents that you can submit to substantiate
any impact.

8
Please note that if you don’t have documents, you should still submit the form but you may be asked for documentation
at a later stage.

Need help?

If you are having difficulties with understanding or completing an assessment task, contact your Subject Coordinator
as soon as possible. Western also has a range of academic support services, including:

– Library Study Smart: book a one-to-one Zoom consultation with a literacy expert. You can discuss how
to develop your assignment writing and study skills or seek assistance to understand referencing and citation
requirements. Check the Library Study Smart website for how-to study guides and tools.
– Studiosity: Upload your assignment draft to Studiosity within vUWS to receive writing feedback within 24
hours.
– Online workshops, programs and resources: From maths and stats help to academic literacy and peer support
programs, the University has a range of resources to assist.

Please also remember that there is a range of wellbeing support available - from counselling and disability services to
welfare.

9
3.2.1 Critical review of Module 1 (Quality Systems)

Weight: 30%
Type of Collaboration: Individual
Due: Session 6
Submission: Via Turnitin on vUWS
Format: Length: At least 1,000 words. Should not exceed 1,500 words (Excluding word
count in tables, figures, and appendices)
Length: 1,000 words
Use of Artificial Intelligence: In this assessment task, you will not be able to meet the learning outcomes
related to (i) recommending alternate approaches to ensuring quality, risk,
and performance management compliance in organisations; (ii) assess the
applicability of various compliance elements in business; and (iii) apply
economic, social and environmental responsibility decision-making frameworks
in the context of compliance management by using generative artificial
intelligence (AI) tools. Working with another person or technology in order to
gain an unfair advantage in assessment, or improperly obtaining answers from
a third party including generative AI to questions in an examination or other
form of assessment, may lead to sanctions under the Student Misconduct Rule.
Use of generative AI tools may be detected. More information is available on
the Library web page.

Instructions:

Overview
Please refer to the recent quality management literature (academic journals) and select one article published within
the past three years. You may not choose an article that is part of the reading list. The focus of this exercise is
on the development of analytical skills. Consult with the lecturer about the appropriateness of the article prior to
starting the assessment; then conduct a thorough critique, addressing and considering the following points.

– Overall ”message” or objectives of the study/article.

– Relevance of the article to:

1. The broad total quality management literature.

2. Industry practitioners.
3. Economic, social, and environmental decisions and practice.
4. Gaps/weaknesses/limitations of the article.

Note: Be sure you understand what is meant by ”critique”. Critique is an accepted and established process of orderly
scholarly debate. Critique is influenced by the scientific method of analysis. Critique is based upon an informed
opinion, and never upon personal opinion. Informed opinion is accepted as being technical knowledge, personal or
professional experience, or specified training. If you use other academic journals to inform your opinion, be sure to
reference and cite them properly using the Harvard referencing style. The university’s library website has an excellent
referencing guide at http://library.westernsydney.edu.au/main/guides/referencing-citation

Details
The format of the critique must include the following sections (in clear headings please)

10
Introduction
This section is not an executive summary. It is also not a description of the structure of the paper. The purpose of
this section is to provide a short summary of the relevance of the theme of the paper. It should be approximately,
five per cent of the length of the entire document.

Analysis
This section must analyse the content of article. It must state the objectives of the article, present a brief summary
of the methodology adopted by the authors to achieve the objectives, and present in a concise way, the main findings.
It must be at least 30 per cent of the length of the entire document.

Gaps, limitations and weaknesses identified in article

Gaps typically refer to the area of knowledge under investigation, for instance. Limitations refer to the scope of
the study - its ”generalisability” and/or applicability of the findings, etc. Weaknesses refer to the article itself: its
arguments, methodology, and any problems you might identify in it. This section should be concise and must be less
than 200 words of the length of the entire document.

Implications
This section must present the implications of the study’s findings for:

1. The field of quality management.

2. Industry practitioners.
3. Future implications, for professional or enterprise practice

This section is an important part of your critique that demonstrates your understanding of the implications of the
findings. It should be at least 30 per cent of the length of the entire document.

Conclusion
Approximately 5 per cent of the length of the entire document. At least 1,000 words. Should not exceed 1,500 words
(Excluding word count in Tables, Figures and Appendices)

Note: Approximate number of words of the document: 1,000 - 1,500 words plus or minus 10 per cent.

The assessment is heavily reliant upon thoroughness, in-depth discussion, and critical analysis. In addition, clarity,
proper sentence structure, grammar and other communication skills are largely expected of postgraduate students;
these skills will also be rigorously assessed/evaluated and contribute 30 per cent of the assessment marks. The
marking guide for this assessment item follows. The report should be submitted in Microsoft Word .doc or .docx
format via Turnitin.

Note: The successful completion of Critical Review of Module 1 (Quality Systems) will assure that students are
able to apply economic, social and environmental responsibility decision-making frameworks in the context of quality
management within broader compliance management context.

Note: Marking Criteria

An updated copy of marking criteria will be available on vUWS at the start of the teaching period.

11
Marking Criteria:

Overall evaluation of Structure, language, and

economic, social and conventions (30%)
environmental decisions
including
recommendations for
future practice (70%)
Depth and breadth of Evaluate economic, Recommend course of
coverage social and environmental action including
(CSR) decisions and contingencies,
practice using alternatives and future
appropriate implication for
policy/framework/ professional or enterprise
guidelines/laws. practice
Fail Overall, the content was Does not evaluate Does not formulate a The written work is not
49 and below superficial, and/or decisions or practice with course of action suitable of an academic/
inadequately addressed appropriate CSR for CSR contexts. professional business
the areas of the critique, guidelines. writing standard. For
clearly illustrating lack of example, there are
understanding, effort, multiple errors in
commitment, time spelling, word use,
management, and grammar, sentence
competency. structure, etc.
Pass Different aspects of the Descriptive evaluation of Recommends a course of The structure of the
64-50 exercise/question were CSR decisions and action for some CSR written work is very
addressed and researched practice with an attempt contexts to enterprise or basic, demonstrating
adequately. Discussion, to justify implications. professional practice, limited polishing and
interpretations and with limited justification. self-critique prior to
recommendations were completing the
brief and unorganized, assessment. Several areas
demonstrating limited show gaps/shortcomings
understanding, in spelling, word choice,
preparation, time grammar, and related
management and overall issues.
limited preparation.
Credit Most aspects of the Evaluates CSR decisions Recommends a course of Only some aspects of the
74-65 critique were addressed and practice some action suitable to written work conform to
adequately but the justification of relevant CSR contexts in an acceptable academic/
overall quality of the implications using enterprise or professional professional business
report is far from being appropriate practice, with writing standard. Some
outstanding. For policy/framework/ justification. spelling, word choice, and
example, the discussion, guidelines/laws. grammar issues are/were
implications, identified in the report.
recommendations, and
other critical areas of the
answer/discussion were
only minimally
elaborated.
Distinction Most aspects of the Evaluates CSR decisions Recommends a Most aspects of the
84-75 critique were addressed and practice with good comprehensive course of written work conform to
in depth, though overall justification of action suitable to CSR a high
the quality of the content implications using current contexts in enterprise or academic/professional
falls short from being policy/framework/guidelines/laws.
professional practice with business writing
outstanding. For broad consideration of standard. However, there
example, the discussion, the context and are gaps and
implications, justification. shortcomings, for
recommendations, and instance, concerning
other critical areas of the spelling, grammar other
discussion were not critical elements
elaborated as thoroughly pertaining to business
and as extensively as writing.
they are expected to be
at a postgraduate level.

Continued on next page

12
 (Continued)

High Distinction The critique document Insightful evaluation of Recommends insightful All aspects of the written
100-85 was skilfully completed. CSR decisions and course of action suitable work conform to a high
For example, in terms of practice providing strong to CSR context in academic/professional
discussion, elaboration, justification of the enterprise or professional business writing
and structure, the writer implications using current practice with broad standard, especially
demonstrated policy/framework/ consideration of the regarding word choice,
thoroughness and depth. guidelines/laws. context and with strong spelling, grammar,
Outstanding analytical justification. sentence structure,
skills were demonstrated, length of sentences, use
especially in discussing of headings, as well as
gaps and limitations of other critical elements
the article being pertaining to business
critiqued, as well as writing.
presenting the
implications of the
findings for the field of
quality management and
for industry practitioners.
In essence: The written
work shows great depth
of thought, excellent
development of
argument, logical
analysis, and insight into
the subject.

13
3.2.2 Critical Review of Module 2 (Risk Management) or Module 3 (Performance Measurement)

Weight: 30%
Type of Collaboration: Individual
Due: Session 8
Submission: Via Turnitin on vUWS
Format: Length: At least 1,000 words. Should not exceed 1,500 words (Excluding word
count in tables, figures, list of references, and appendices)
Length: 1,000 words
Use of Artificial Intelligence: Use of generative artificial intelligence (AI) is not permitted in this assessment
task without appropriate acknowledgment. See advice on acknowledging the
use of generative AI on the Library web page. Working with another person or
technology in order to gain an unfair advantage in assessment, or improperly
obtaining answers from a third party including generative AI to questions in
an examination or other form of assessment, may lead to sanctions under the
Student Misconduct Rule. Use of generative AI tools may be detected. More
information is available on the Library web page.

Instructions:

2.4.2.1. Risk Management Module

Overview
This assessment task is not a critique. It is a research paper. Students are to prepare a report on an area of risk in an
industry of their choosing (all learning outcomes). The focus in this exercise is on the development of research skills.
Therefore, students are expected to refer to a balance of relevant articles from academic, industry and government
sources. Examples taken from newspaper and magazine articles may also be used to illustrate particular aspects of
the report but must not be the dominant source of research information.
Approximate number of words of the document: 1,000 - 1,500 words plus or minus 10 per cent.
Details
Each report should be written under the following sub headings:
Executive summary:
A concise summary of the information contained in the body of the report. An executive summary is not an
introduction, an abstract, or a summary. Since it is worth 25 per cent of the marks, serious attention should be paid
to this section.
Industry overview:
A description of the industry being considered. The description should set the context in which the study has been
conducted.
A major area of risk in this industry:
Note that this is not an examination of any firm-specific risk, but rather a description of an area of risk that needs
to be dealt with in the chosen industry. This section should provide a quantitative and/or qualitative assessment of
the effects of inappropriate management of the risk.
Standards relating to the identified risk area:
A description of industry and government standards applying to the identified risk area.
Developments in dealing with the identified risk area in this industry.
A review of appropriate industry commentary on developments in dealing with the identified area of risk.
Marking Criteria and Standards
Understanding of the topic under investigation: refers to your ability to demonstrate an understanding of the key
risks in the industry being considered and the main methods used to manage those risks.

14
 Able to demonstrate independent critical research and analysis skills Refers to your ability to carry out an independent review of the
literature to identify the key risks faced in an industry and the manner
in which they are managed in that industry. It is expected the literature
review will also incorporate within the risk management framework,
economic, social, and environmental decisions and practice, including
recommendations for professional or enterprise practice.It is expected
that you will refer to at least ten separate information sources in your
report. At least five sources should be journal articles or books and
should not be www references.

Ability to construct a coherent, logical, and sustained line of argument Refers to your ability to construct and present ideas in a coherent and
professional manner. The student develops a clear line of reasoning by
supporting her/his discussion with relevant examples and information
sources.

Clarity of expression: refers to your ability to communicate to your Student ability to utilise sound structure, grammar, and spelling.
reader
Referencing Refers to your acknowledgement of information sources used to support
your analysis. Required: at least 10 different sources, mainly
contemporary academic sources (a mix of journal articles, books, both
recent and previous). Student demonstrates an ability to utilise the
Harvard style of referencing.

Presentation, structure Document conforms to the template available on vUWS for this
program. Document is formatted to an acceptable standard using
Times New Roman script, 12 point font size, and single spacing. The
structure of the presentation is organised, following the suggested
headings. The research report should be submitted in Microsoft Word
.doc or .docx format via Turnitin.The main body of the report should be
1,000 (plus or minus 10%) words in length. This word count does not
include table of contents, tables, figures, appendices and references.
The report should be typed, single-spaced (Times Roman font 12 or
equivalent), with 25 mm (or 1 inch) margins all round. Numbering of
pages is essential

Marking Guide and Criteria

Criteria Unsatisfactory Fail Barely Satisfactory Satisfactory Credit Superior Quality Outstanding
0-49% Pass 50%-64% 65%-74% Distinction Quality High
75%-84% Distinction
85%-100%
The executive A general A general A summary A clear summary A clear succinct
summary 25% introduction introduction with providing reasonable that provides the summary that
containing minimal limited specific guidance on the reader with an provides the reader
information about detail about the content of the in-depth view of the with an excellent
the report. report. report. contents of the view of the contents
report. of the report.

The research 25% Fails to use Utilises a very Utilises a minimal Utilises a range of Utilises a range of
authoritative limited set of set of external external references external references
sources. References external references references with indicating that the indicating that the
are inappropriate or with a support of topic has been well topic has been
poorly used. preponderance of information from researched. excellently
information subject subject reading researched.
reading materials. materials.

Continued on next page

15
 (Continued)

The body of the Disjointed, Presence of basic Organisation of A clear and A sophisticated and
report particular unfocused report information; lack of ideas is relatively coherent report coherent report
attention to overall lacking coherence coherence; lack of clear, but some and/or analytical and/or analytical
evaluation of and continuity. supporting further development framework. framework. Report
economic, social Little or no analysis citations. Major still required. Objectives of the objectives are
and environmental of economic, social improvements References study are clearly supported by a
decisions including and environmental needed to create provided, but supported by strong set of
recommendation aspects of the coherence.Reasonable connections with relevant references. relevant references.
for future practice business context analysis of the report content Very good analysis Excellent analysis of
40% economic, social are vague.Good of economic, social economic, social
and environmental analysis of and environmental and environmental
aspects of the economic, social aspects of the aspects of the
business context and environmental business context business context
aspects of the
business context

Referencing 5% The ideas from Most of the ideas The student All of the ideas The student is well
information sources from information demonstrates a from information versed and practiced
have not been sources have been basic understanding sources have been in both in-text
acknowledged with acknowledged.However, of the Harvard (or acknowledged. The referencing, as well
citations, and/or understanding of other) system but student as in the Harvard
the student the Harvard system there is still demonstrates an (or other) system
presented an (or other system) is inconsistency in in-depth (reference page).
author’s words as poor. referencing. understanding of
her/his own. the Harvard (or
other) system.

Presentation and The student has not The student has The student has The student has The student has
structure 5% followed the followed few of the followed some of followed most of the followed all the
guidelines for the guidelines; there is the guidelines. A guidelines. guidelines and
presentation of evident room for well-presented piece Presentation of the submitted a
work. improvement. of work. work is appropriate. professional
document.

2.4.2.2. Performance Measurement Module

Overview
Please refer to the recent literature (academic journals) in the area of performance measurement and benchmarking
and select one article published within the past three years. You may not choose an article that is part of the
reading list. The focus of this exercise is on the development of analytical skills. Consult with the lecturer about
the appropriateness of the article prior to starting the assessment; then conduct a thorough critique, addressing and
considering the following points.

– Overall ”message” or objectives of the study/article.

– Relevance of the article to:

- The broad field of performance measurement and benchmarking.

- Industry practitioners.

- Future implications, for professional or enterprise practice

- Gaps/weaknesses/limitations of the article.

Note: Be sure you understand what is meant by ”critique”. Critique is an accepted and established process of orderly
scholarly debate. Critique is influenced by the scientific method of analysis. Critique is based upon an informed
opinion, and never upon personal opinion. Informed opinion is accepted as being technical knowledge, personal or
professional experience, or specified training. If you use other academic journals to inform your opinion, be sure to
reference and cite them properly using the Harvard referencing style. The university’s library website has an excellent
referencing guide at http://library.uws.edu.au/FILES/cite_Harvard.pdf

Details
The format of the critique must include the following sections (in clear headings please):

16
Introduction
This section is not an executive summary. It is also not a description of the structure of the paper. The purpose of
this section is to provide a short summary of the relevance of the theme of the paper. It should be approximately,
five per cent of the length of the entire document.

Analysis
This section must analyse the content of article. It must state the objectives of the article, present a brief summary
of the methodology adopted by the authors to achieve the objectives, and present in a concise way, the main findings.
It must be at least 30 per cent of the length of the entire document.

Gaps, limitations and weaknesses identified in article

Gaps typically refer to the area of knowledge under investigation, for instance. Limitations refer to the scope of
the study - its ”generalizability” and/or applicability of the findings, etc. Weaknesses refer to the article itself: its
arguments, methodology, and any problems you might identify in it.

This section should be concise and must be less than 200 words of the length of the entire document.

Implications
This section must present the implications of the study’s findings for

1. The field of performance measurement and benchmarking

2. Industry practitioners and researchers
3. Future implications, for professional or enterprise practice

Conclusion
Approximately 5 per cent of the length of the entire document.

Note: Approximate number of words of the document: 1,000 - 1,500 words plus or minus 10 per cent.

17
Marking Criteria:

The assessment is heavily reliant upon thoroughness, in-depth discussion, and critical analysis. In addition, clarity,
proper sentence structure, grammar and other communication skills are largely expected of postgraduate students;
these skills will also be rigorously assessed/evaluated and contribute 30% of the assessment marks. The marking
guide for this assessment item follows. The report should be submitted in Microsoft Word .doc or .docx format via
Turnitin.

Marks Depth and breadth of coverage Overall Structure, language, and conventions (30%)
evaluation of economic, social and
environmental decisions including
recommendations for future practice (70%)
Fail Overall, the content was superficial, and/or The written work is not of an academic /
49 and below inadequately addressed the areas of the professional business writing standard. For
critique, clearly illustrating lack of example, there are multiple errors in spelling,
understanding, effort, commitment, time word use, grammar, sentence structure, etc.
management, and competency.
Pass Different aspects of the exercise/question The structure of the written work is very
64-50 were addressed and researched adequately. basic, demonstrating limited polishing and
Discussion, interpretations and self-critique prior to completing the
recommendations were brief and unorganized, assessment. Several areas show
demonstrating limited understanding, gaps/shortcomings in spelling, word choice,
preparation, time management and overall grammar, and related issues.
limited preparation.
Credit Most aspects of the critique were addressed Only some aspects of the written work
74-65 adequately but the overall quality of the conform to an acceptable academic /
report is far from being outstanding. For professional business writing standard. Some
example, the discussion, implications, spelling, word choice, and grammar issues
recommendations, and other critical areas of are/were identified in the report.
the answer/discussion were only minimally
elaborated.
Distinction Most aspects of the critique were addressed in Most aspects of the written work conform to
84-75 depth, though overall the quality of the a high academic / professional business
content falls short from being outstanding. writing standard. However, there are gaps and
For example, the discussion, implications, shortcomings, for instance, concerning
recommendations, and other critical areas of spelling, grammar other critical elements
the discussion were not elaborated as pertaining to business writing.
thoroughly and as extensively as they are
expected to be at a postgraduate level.
High Distinction The critique document was skillfully All aspects of the written work conform to a
100-85 completed. For example, in terms of high academic / professional business writing
discussion, elaboration, and structure, the standard, especially regarding word choice,
writer demonstrated thoroughness and depth. spelling, grammar, sentence structure, length
Outstanding analytical skills were of sentences, use of headings, as well as other
demonstrated, especially in discussing gaps critical elements pertaining to business
and limitations of the article being critiqued, writing.
as well as presenting the implications of the
findings for the field of performance
measurement and benchmarking and for
industry practitioners. In essence: The written
work shows great depth of thought, excellent
development of argument, logical analysis,
and insight into the subject.

18
3.2.3 Final Examination

Weight: 40%
Type of Collaboration: Individual
Due: Examination during exam period.
Submission: The mode of exam delivery and submission will be notified/confirmed during
the session.
Format:
Length: 2 hours
Threshold Detail: Should achieve a satisfactory mark of 45 per cent (18 out of 40) in the final
examination.
Use of Artificial Intelligence: In this assessment task, you will not be able to meet the learning outcomes
related to (i) explain the features of compliance management within a business
setting from quality, risk and performance management perspectives; (ii) assess
the applicability of various compliance elements in business; and (iii) apply
economic, social and environmental responsibility decision-making frameworks
in the context of compliance management by using generative artificial
intelligence (AI) tools. Working with another person or technology in order to
gain an unfair advantage in assessment, or improperly obtaining answers from
a third party including generative AI to questions in an examination or other
form of assessment, may lead to sanctions under the Student Misconduct Rule.
Use of generative AI tools may be detected. More information is available on
the Library web page.

Instructions:

19
Marking Criteria:

Marking Criteria and Standards

Please refer to the grid below. Students are most welcome to meet with the lecturer and discuss the progress of
their preparation for this task. As with the other assessments, please note that the lecturer is not responsible for
dissatisfying marks if students do not make the effort to consult the lecturer regarding his expectations of students’
work, ideally sessions before this assessment takes place.

Marking Criteria:

Marks Depth and breadth of coverage (70%) Structure, language and conventions (30%)
Fail Responses were superficial and/or The written work is not of an academic/
49 and below inadequately addressed the exercise/question, professional standard. For example, there are
clearly illustrating lack of effort, commitment, multiple errors in spelling, word use, grammar,
and competency. sentence structure, etc.
Discussion, interpretation, implication, and
recommendations/suggestions were brief
and/or almost inexistent, demonstrating
little/no understanding.
Pass Different aspects of the exercise/question The written work displays basic structure.
64-50 were addressed and researched adequately. However, several areas show some
Discussion, interpretation, implications, and gaps/inadequacies in spelling, word choice,
recommendations/suggestions were brief and grammar, and related issues.
unorganized, demonstrating limited
understanding.
Credit Most aspects of the exercise/question were Only some aspects of the written work
74-65 addressed adequately but overall the conform to an acceptable academic/
answer/content is far from outstanding, both professional standard. Some spelling, word
qualitatively and quantitatively (length of choice and grammar issues are present in the
answer/discussion). For example, discussion, report.
interpretations implications,
recommendations/suggestions, and other
critical areas of the answer/discussion were
only minimally elaborated.
Distinction Most aspects of the exercise/question were Most aspects of the written work conform to
84-75 addressed in depth, and the structure of the a high academic/professional standard.
answer (e.g., discussion, implications, However, there are gaps and shortcomings, for
recommendations/suggestions) were instance, concerning spelling, grammar other
satisfactory, though overall the quality (and critical elements pertaining to business
quantity) of the content falls short from being writing.
outstanding.
Furthermore, the discussion, interpretation,
implications, recommendations, and other
critical areas of the answer/discussion were
not elaborated as extensively and thoroughly
as they are expected to be at a postgraduate
level.
High Distinction The answer or objective of the exercise was All aspects of the written work conform to a
100-85 discussed, elaborated, and structured in a very high academic/professional standard,
clear and thorough manner. Outstanding especially regarding word choice, spelling,
analytical skills were demonstrated, as well as grammar, sentence structure, length of
outstanding interpretation of sentences, use of headings (if applicable),
numbers/calculations, a very thorough clarity in hand-writing, as well as other critical
discussion providing implications and elements pertaining to business writing.
recommendations/ suggestions. In essence:
The written work shows excellent structure
(e.g., breaking down different areas of the
answer into discussion, interpretation,
implications, recommendations/suggestions),
great depth of thought, excellent development
of argument, logical analysis and insight into
the subject.

20
4 Readings and Resources

4.1 Essential Readings

Prescribed Textbook

There is no prescribed textbook for this subject.

Essential Reading

Refer to Readings & Resources link in vUWS.

4.2 Recommended Readings

Additional Reading

Benchmarking: An International Journal.

Brown, MG 2007, Beyond the balanced scorecard: improving business intelligence with analytics, Productivity Press,
New York.

Business Process Management Journal.

Chan, J, Kwan, R & Wong E 2005, Quality management: a new era, World Scientific Pub, Singapore.

Ducket, GH 2011, Practical enterprise risk management: a business process approach, Wiley, Hoboken, NJ.

Evans, JR 2008, Quality and performance excellence: management, organization, and strategy, 5th edn, Thomson
Business and Economics, Mason, Ohio.

Harbour, JL 2009, The basics of performance measurement, CRC Press, Boca Raton.

Hopkins, A 2005, Safety, culture and risk: the organisational causes of disasters, CCH Australia, North Ryde.

International Journal of Operations and Production Management.

James R, Evans, JR & Lindsay, WM 2011, Managing for quality and performance excellence, South-Western/Cengage
Learning, Mason, Ohio.

Journal of Risk Research, Routledge, Milton Park, UK.

Julnes, PDL et al. 2008, International handbook of practice-based performance management, Sage Publications,
Thousand Oaks, Cal.

Kaplan, RS & Norton, DP 2004, Strategy maps, Harvard Business School Press, USA, pp. 29-56.

Mauch, PD 2010, Quality management theory and application, CRC Press, Boca Raton.

21
Montgomery, DC, Jennings, CL & Pfund, ME 2011, Managing, Controlling and Improving Quality John Wiley &
Sons, Hoboken, NJ.

Neely, A (ed) 2007, Business performance measurement: Unifying theory and integrating practice, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge UK.

Neely, A 2007, ’Measuring performance: the operations management perspective’, in Neely, A (ed), Business
performance management, 2nd edn, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK, pp. 64-81.

Reuvid, J 2008, Managing business risk a practical guide to protecting your business, Kogan Page, London;
Philadelphia.

Sadgrove, K 2005, The complete guide to business risk management, 2nd edn, Ashgate Pub.

Spedding, LS & Rose, A 2008, Business risk management handbook a sustainable approach, CIMA, Oxford;
Burlington, MA.

Summers, DCS 2009 Quality management: creating and sustaining organizational effectiveness, Pearson/Prentice
Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.

The Journal of Risk, Incisive Media PLC, London.

Waters, CDJ & MyiLibrary 2007, Supply chain risk management vulnerability and resilience in logistics, Kogan Page,
London.

4.3 Other Teaching and Learning Resources

22
5 Key Teaching and Learning Policies

The University has several policies that relate to teaching and learning. Links to important policies affecting students
are below. It is your responsibility to ensure you familiarise yourself with these policies so that you are aware of your
rights and responsibilities.

– Assessment Policy
– Assessment Policy - Review of Grade Procedures
– Bullying Prevention Policy
– Disruption to Studies Policy
– Enrolment Policy
– Examinations Policy
– Learning and Teaching Policy
– Progression Policy
– Student Code of Conduct
– Student Misconduct Rule

23