ASSIGNMENT 1
AIM
The objective of this assignment is to reinforce the relevance of the systems approach to analysing risk. Its aim is to extend the concepts of residual uncertainty, strategic fit and systems analysis to diagnose, analyse and manage risk. This is achieved by asking students to apply these concepts to examine a risk situation in a logistics management context.
TASKS
1) Think of a risk situation within the domain of logistics management. Using the technique of systems modelling, characterise the situation as a complex dynamic system by tracing the interdependency relationships between the key variables and nurturing conditions under which the risk would most likely occur.
Need to present a flow chart as well (i.e. sample as attached)
2) Next, based on the system developed to represent the risk situation, systematically assess the degree of control, levels of uncertainty (Courtney et al. 1997), and growth potential embedded in each of the key variables and nurturing conditions that are perceived to give rise to the risk situation.
3) Using the results of the assessment in Task 2, derive an appropriate risk mitigation measure which may be applied to reduce the risk involved. Rationalise the merits of the proposed measure by drawing on the various schools of thought discussed in the risk management doctrines provided in Hood et al. (1992).
4) In the process of identifying how the proposed measure is likely to reduce or eliminate the perceived risk, make an attempt to:
i) assess whether the intended action is likely to create a new risk situation and, if so, whether any new measure(s) has to be adopted to minimise the occurrence of the new risk (state the new measure[s]); and
ii) if a new mitigation measure is warranted, redraw the system diagram to incorporate the new sets of key factors to fully capture the dynamic complexity of the original and new risk situations.
5) Reassess the system model developed in Task 1, checking whether it allows for:
i) other risk mitigation measures be identified? If yes, compare the relative effectiveness of the new measure(s) against that proposed in Task 3 based on the configurations of the systems model presented. Discuss the relationship between the new measure(s) and that presented in Task 3 based on the notion of strategic fit advanced by Porter (1996); and
ii) plausible gains arising from the intended action in Task 3 be discerned? If yes, compare the trade-off effects between the plausible gains and the potential losses stemming from the new risk situation discussed in Task 4 (i).
REFERENCING AND PRESENTATION
While referencing the nominated articles is essential, students are encouraged to seek other reference materials, where appropriate, to supplement their arguments. The use of tables, graphs, charts and other graphic aids are strongly encouraged. All assumptions used in the study, together with the rationale for their adoption, have to be duly stated.
WORD LIMIT
The body text should not exceed 12 pages (diagrams, charts and tables included) using a font size no smaller than 10 points at 1.5 line spacing.
ASSESSMENT
This assignment is worth 50% of the final grade. It will be assessed according to the extent to which each of the stipulated tasks has been carried out.
DUE DATE
Refer to announcement during Workshop. GOOD LUCK!
REFERENCES:
Courtney, H. Kirkland, J. and Viguerie, P. (1997) "Strategy Under Uncertainty", Harvard Business Review, Nov-Dec: 67-79.
Hood, et al. (1992) "Risk Management" in Risk Analysis, Perception and Management. Report of a Royal Society Study Group. London: The Royal Society: 135-201.
Porter, M. (1996) "What is Strategy?" Harvard Business Review, Nov-Dec: 61-78.
0 comments:
Post a Comment