Module Learning Outcomes Assessed:

 

LO1- Differentiate between tiers of the Quality Hierarchy and design quality improvement programmes to transcend the hierarchy in order to contribute to increasing business performance.

LO2- Appraise different quality improvement techniques which are applied in a manufacturing environment.

 

Assessment

The marks will be awarded for detailed, accurate explanations and comments along with completeness of charts.

 

Plagiarism

Any suspected cases of plagiarism or collusion will be dealt with via Coventry University disciplinary procedures.

Do not “cut and paste” paragraphs/chapters from sources of literature.

All quotes, figures, illustrations etc must be correctly referenced via the Coventry Harvard referencing system.

Notes:

1.       You are expected to use the Coventry University APA referencing format. For support and advice on this students can contact Academic Liaison Librarian or Centre for Academic Writing (CAW).

2.       Please notify your registry course support team and module leader for disability support.

3.       Any student requiring an extension or deferral should follow the university process.

4.       The University cannot take responsibility for any coursework lost or corrupted on disks, laptops or personal computer. Students should therefore regularly back-up any work and are advised to save it on the University system.

 

 

ASSIGNMENT 1 BRIEF

 

A manufacturing company with 200 employees supplying parts to the automotive industry is planning to implement a programme of Total Quality Management (TQM).

 

As part of a management consultancy team you are required to prepare a report for the company’s managing director. In your report you must identify and discuss:

Section A

 

Your report must include a discussion of five ISO 9004 TQM principle.

 

[25 Marks]

 

Cost of quality is part of TQM programme and a management technique that expresses a company’s performance in the language of the senior management.

 

Your report must discuss and explain the costs of quality and their relationship.

 

[20 Marks]

 

Section B

 

In your report discuss and appraise two quality improvement techniques.

 

[10 Marks]

 

 

During your fact finding and data collection visit at the company one of the manufacturing engineers discusses concerns about the number of defects with a process. You are given the following data to investigate the process and report back.

 

You decide on constructing manual control charts and commenting on the process.

The sample size is five and the specification is 60.02.0.

[15 Marks]

 

 

 

You also decide to investigate process capability and comment.

[10 Marks]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sample

Number

Mean Range Sample

Number

Mean Range
1

2

3

4

5

 

6

7

8

9

10

 

11

12

13

14

15

 

16

17

18

19

20

 

21

22

23

24

25

60.0

60.0

61.8

59.2

60.4

 

59.6

60.0

60.2

60.6

59.6

 

59.0

61.0

60.4

59.8

60.8

 

60.4

59.6

59.6

59.4

61.8

 

60.0

60.0

60.4

60.0

61.2

5

3

4

3

4

 

4

2

1

2

5

 

2

1

5

2

2

 

2

1

5

3

4

 

4

5

7

5

2

26

27

28

29

30

 

31

32

33

34

35

 

36

37

38

39

40

 

41

42

43

44

45

 

46

47

48

49

50

59.6

60.0

61.2

60.8

60.8

 

60.6

60.6

63.6

61.2

61.0

 

61.0

61.4

60.2

60.2

60.0

 

61.2

60.6

61.4

60.4

62.4

 

63.2

63.6

63.8

62.0

64.6

3

4

3

5

5

 

4

3

3

2

7

 

3

5

4

4

7

 

4

5

5

5

6

 

5

7

5

6

4

 

 

In your report provide conclusions and recommendations for the management

[10 Marks]

 

Report presentation

Marks will be allocated for report presentation style, neatness, structure, grammar, use of tables, figures and referencing.

[10 Marks]

 

Total           [100 Marks]

 

 

 

 

Marking Rubric

GRADE

 

ANSWER RELEVANCE   ARGUMENT & COHERENCE   EVIDENCE   SUMMARY  
First

 

≥70

Innovative response, answers the question fully, addressing the learning objectives of the assessment task.  Evidence of critical analysis, synthesis and evaluation.

 

  A clear, consistent in-depth critical and evaluative argument, displaying the ability to develop original ideas from a range of sources.  Engagement with theoretical and conceptual analysis.

 

  Wide range of appropriately supporting evidence provided, going beyond the recommended texts.  Correctly referenced.   An outstanding, well-structured and appropriately referenced answer, demonstrating a high degree of understanding and critical analytic skills.  
Upper Second

 

60-69

 

 

 

A very good attempt to address the objectives of the assessment task with an emphasis on those elements requiring critical review.   A generally clear line of critical and evaluative argument is presented.  Relationships between statements and sections are easy to follow, and there is a sound, coherent structure.   A very good range of relevant sources is used in a largely consistent way as supporting evidence.  There is use of some sources beyond recommended texts.  Correctly referenced in the main.   The answer demonstrates a very good understanding of theories, concepts and issues, with evidence of reading beyond the recommended minimum.  Well organised and clearly written.  
Lower Second

 

50-59

 

 

Competently addresses objectives, but may contain errors or omissions and critical discussion of issues may be superficial or limited in places.

 

 

  Some critical discussion, but the argument is not always convincing, and the work is descriptive in places, with over-reliance on the work of others.

 

  A range of relevant sources is used, but the critical evaluation aspect is not fully presented.  There is limited use of sources beyond the standard recommended materials.  Referencing is not always correctly presented.

 

  The answer demonstrates a good understanding of some relevant        theories, concepts and issues, but there are some errors and irrelevant material included.  The structure lacks clarity.  
Third

 

40-49

 

 

 

Addresses most objectives of the assessment task, with some notable omissions.  The structure is unclear in parts, and there is limited analysis.   The work is descriptive with minimal critical discussion and limited theoretical engagement.   A limited range of relevant sources used without appropriate presentation as supporting or conflicting evidence coupled with very limited critical analysis. Referencing has some errors.   Some understanding is demonstrated but is incomplete, and there is evidence of limited research on the topic. Poor structure and presentation, with few and/or poorly presented references.  
Fail

 

<40

Some deviation from the objectives of the assessment task.  May not consistently address the assignment brief.  At the lower end fails to answer the question set or address the learning outcomes.  There is minimal evidence of analysis or evaluation.   Descriptive with no evidence of theoretical engagement, critical discussion or theoretical engagement.  At the lower end displays a minimal level of understanding.   Very limited use and application of relevant sources as supporting evidence.  At the lower end demonstrates a lack of real understanding.  Poor presentation of references.   Whilst some relevant material is present, the level of understanding is poor with limited evidence of wider reading. Poor structure and poor presentation, including referencing. At the lower end there is evidence of a lack of comprehension, resulting in an assignment that is well below the required standard.

 

 
Late submission

 

0   0   0   0