Digital Transformation Strategy Essay - Module Assessment

The module uses two modes of assessments to assist student learning and to test different types of knowledge, skills, and module learning outcomes. Your grade for the module will be based on a 15- min Group Presentation (weighted at 25%) and a 2,000-word Essay (weighted at 75%). Please check Canvas and Sussex Direct for the submission deadline and other details.

1. Link to module learning outcomes This Essay links to all four module learning outcomes (see the Module information page on Canvas).

2. Essay topic (75 %) Maintaining the assumptions in your first assignment (group presentation), you – who has both academic and practical background in the area of DT – are working in the Digital Transformation office in the same organisation. Being satisfied with your previous presentation, the top management team asked you to suggest their Digital Transformation strategy.

This piece of writing is supposed to be different from other traditional report as it is composed of two parts: an 800-word literature review followed by a 1,200-word strategy report:

• Part 1: Provide a critical review of existing literature focusing on one dimension associated with ‘digital transformation (DT)’. Your selected dimension should be either conceptual (e.g. definitions, etc.), business (e.g. business model innovation enabled by digital technologies, etc.), or technological (e.g. underlying technologies).

This part should demonstrate your knowledge and understanding of DT and other relevant concepts/theories through the review of established literature, stemming from high-quality academic resources as well as other professional/industrial resources.

• Part 2: Suggest a new Digital Transformation strategy for your client organisation. This part should demonstrate your understanding and knowledge of this topic by using relevant concepts and theories discussed in the module. You can also provide your knowledge and insights learned from other reliable resources where appropriate. Importantly, your writing should be guided by relevant concepts and theories and it is crucial to include academic research to underpin your suggestions and implications where applicable.

 Marking Process and Ensuring Marking Fairness

• The University takes several steps to ensure marking fairness.

• Assessment Convening: The module convenor is usually the lead marker, designs the assessment, and specifies the marking criteria.

• Calibration: When there are several markers:

• They calibrate their marking expectations and scale, usually in a meeting before the marking begins. They usually mark a few submissions together and discuss the characteristic of poor to excellent works using the marking criteria.

• The module convenor checks the marks and distributions by each marker to ensure similarity and fairness across groups. By analysing the data, any unexplained anomalies are identified and compensated.

• Moderation: A sample of the marked submissions/scripts (including some from each mark classification) is then looked at by a moderator to confirm the accuracy of the marking (if they feel there is a problem they may recommend a third person to review all scripts).

• External Examination: The sample is then sent to an external examiner to confirm that the marking has been appropriate and internal procedures have been followed.

• Finally, a Module Assessment Board (MAB) then considers the overall distribution of marks, taking into account any complaints or problems raised concerning each module, and a Progression and Award Board (PAB) agrees awards for successful candidates and resit/sit opportunities for failed modules/assessments.