Innovation audit report
Value: 30%
Due date: 02-Apr-2018
Return date: 24-Apr-2018
Length: 3,000*
Submission method options
Alternative submission method
Task
Innovation is increasingly being considered as a core competency that organisations must develop. Companies that consistently innovate don't rely on chance; they address innovation in a systematic way.
Your task is as follows:
• Drawing on a wide range of literature on innovation develop a framework that you could use to assess an organisation in terms of innovation. Describe your framework and justify the critical elements (with reference to the literature).
• The next step is to apply this framework to a particular organisation of your own choice. Where are the gaps? What is being done well, what areas need to be improved? Note: This organisation may be your own workplace, or an organisation you would like to work for.
• Finally, develop a plan to address areas of weakness. You may choose to focus on a few key areas and discuss them in detail.
Note: If your chosen organisation has a focus on services make sure that you choose literature that is appropriate for service innovation.
Getting started
• Carefully read through assessment items 1 and 2 as they are linked.
• Start reading about innovation. Your textbook (particulary chapters 1 and 4 and chapter 15 for service innovation) and the subject readings will get you going. Several additional references will be placed in resources in the MKT520 subject site to assist you further.
• If you choose to focus on a service, you will need to look at literature on service innovation but you may still also find useful and relevant material on innovation as it relates to physical goods.
• Make sure you are able to clearly define innovation
• From your reading on innovation, start selecting key elements for your framework, choosing those most relevant for chosen organisation.
• Start thinking about how you will assess your chosen organisation in relation to the various elements of the framework you create.
Please note that different frameworks will be developed by different students but they will generally share some common elements.
* Word limit includes executive summary but excludes reference list and appendices. Students may submit work that is +/- 10% of the word limit.
Your work should be referenced using APA-6 Style. For details of referencing requirements see:
student.csu.edu.au/library/integrity/referencing-at-csu and the user friendly CSU referencing guide apps.csu.edu.au/reftool/apa-6
* Word limit includes executive summary but excludes reference list and appendices. Students may submit work that is +/- 10% of the word limit.
PLEASE SUBMIT YOUR WORK AS A WORD NOT A PDF DOCUMENT. THIS WILL MEAN THAT FEEDBACK CAN INCLUDE COMMENTS WITHIN THE TEXT OF YOUR ASSIGNMENT.
Rationale
This assessment task is designed so that you can utilise your work experience in conjunction with your critical literature work on innovation to design a theoretical framework to conduct an audit of your workplace and make recommendations for change.
This task aligns with subject learning outcomes 1 and 2:
• to be able to critically reflect on the role of innovation in organisations and the challenges companies face in new product development.
• to be able to synthesise innovation literature to develop a theoretical framework for use in an audit of innovation practices of a specific organisation and make recommendations for improvement.
Marking criteria
Criteria to be Assessed 110 85-100% DI 7544% CR 65-74% PS 5044% FL 049%
Use of reared Innovation -mature to design end unify innovation framework Value 30% nMgration and orldnafity in the selection and handing d relevant theory M build end justify -mere-. Wide ange of -MC- Integrated n systems. way. Insightful and a...an eelection of theory horn a good range of weds to systemabcally build and lustily framework. Good sender, of theory from a range of sources to build and adequately justifies useful framework. Framework developed but hinted research or Iran...* income.° in areas. Lacks justification of choice of dements. Inaccurate or inappropriate use 01 Merature co /mord.. Framework not developed.
Critical evaluation of chosen organised. Value 30% Identifies and insightfully -cusses areas of strength and weakness in innovation worealities. Strong links to organerstronai contest and *levant theory in evaluation. Identities mid dearly explains dentine and dISCUSSOS areas of strength and Sends 000le491.1 Of Ofeff9 01 strength and weakness in innovation capanlibes. Wu- fefled5 'Wind engagement with organisational context or 10100001 theory. Not ea aspects of task completed in sufficient detai. Pod evaluation. Significant gaps in knowledge of innovatren and lad of understsrakre of company's capabilities.
areas of strength and rankness n knevation COOdb1141435. maul- novgion
Links to organisational corded and relevant theory In evaluation C8pObitieS.1:112.84i0,1 of some relevant issues in awry and orgeneabonaJ content in evaluation.
Recommendations to address areas of weakness Value 30% Excellent recommendations made. Inked to the evaluation Theory used in nsighthil way le justify wornmendations and Isms enhancement d nnovation cagabltbos Very good recommendations made. rated to the evaluation. Used theory systematically M justify recommenamons and discuss enhandment of innovafion corehilds Good fee0flnendalion6 made. Inked 10 the evaluation results / may not have linked back systensafically to relevant theory Some reCann,enclatianS made t net wet Inked 10 the msults of the evaluabon or relevant booty No recommendations made ' no justification
RelerentIng using APA Value 5% Highly accurate oat.° 8 *finance Ire using APA4 Manly and/rate datrens 8 Waren. kit using APA.e Some Inman-. In citations & reference list usng APA4 Makes attempt to provide citations 6 reference list using APA4 Referenong Is absent/ nor systematic
Presentation dished and imaginative approach 1 very WNW:molly presented Logicaty organsed 1 professionally presented 1 Shows organisation and coherence. Aderndod to organ- in a Magical mauler Disorganised / incoherent
Value 5%
Your assessment will be marked out of 100% and you will be given a mark out of 30. Presentation
Requirements for presentation will be located in the resources section of the MKT520 Interact site.