BUSM1734 Risk Analysis Individual Assignment 2 | RMIT

Aim

This individual assignment is designed to assist students in gaining mastery of the different risk analysis techniques introduced in the course. This is achieved by asking students to use a combination of three (or more) techniques learnt in the course to analyse a real risk situation in operations management or business process. 

Task

Select a risk situation in the context of business operations (not the one analysed in Assignment 1). Clearly describe the context and the risk situations surrounding the entire chain of operations, complete with the risk elements involved, with the aid of a rich picture. Using a combination of three or more of the following risk analysis techniques introduced in the course, analyse the risk situation thoroughly, with a view to deriving appropriate, plausible risk minimisation, control or management measures. 

• Coarse Risk Analysis
• Preliminary Hazard Analysis
• Event Tree Analysis
• Failure Mode and Effect Analysis
• Criticality Analysis
• Fault Tree Analysis
• Cause and Consequence Analysis 

Innovative use of the various techniques introduced in class is sought, and the creative application of the concepts introduced in the course (e.g., uncertainty, resilience, transilience, strategic fit, and paradox theory) to developing risk management measures or strategies is stressed. 

Important Note: You are required to fully justify the selection of the techniques used in your analysis. If you are getting information off the Internet or other sources to build your context, you are required to ascertain their validity and reliability. All assumptions made should be duly justified. If you wish to quantitatively enumerate the risk involved, you may assign a probability value to the occurrence of individual events based on your own estimate. However, be sure to state them explicitly and provide the rationale for the assumptions made.

Achieve Higher Grades with BUSM1734 Assignment Solutions

Order Non-Plagiarised Assignment

Wort Limit

Your submission should not exceed 12 pages (including diagrams, charts, and tables but excluding the reference list) 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 how and the extent to which different risk analysis techniques have been innovatively combined to provide a comprehensive analysis of the problem. Emphasis will be given to the rigour of the analysis carried out and the rationale underpinning the selection and use of the selected techniques. The use of tables, graphs, charts and other graphical aids is strongly encouraged. Marks will be awarded as follows: 

• Rationale for problem selection (i.e., Why is the risk problem selected worthy of investigation from the business and operations perspectives?): 5%
• Description of the context with the inclusion of a rich picture and the risk situation(s) being analysed (i.e., Where are the vulnerabilities embedded?): 10%
• Justification for choice of the three (3) techniques (i.e., Why do you select the three risk analysis techniques for your analysis, given the context of your problem? How do the three selected risk analysis techniques complement one another to engender a comprehensive analysis?): 15%
• Rigour and depth (and accuracy, where relevant) of analysis conducted using the 3 selected risk analysis techniques (i.e., What does each of the three risk analyses reveal?): (Note: Three separate, but interrelated, risk analyses are expected. Each risk analysis carries 15%) 45%
• Discussion of recommended risk management measures or strategies based on the results of the 3 risk analyses (i.e., How do the results of the three risk analyses contribute to the creation of a set of effective risk management measures for the problem being investigated?): 10%
• Implementation of the proposed risk management strategies (i.e., What needs to be done in order that the proposed risk management strategies could be implemented “efficiently” and “effectively”? Define implementation efficiency and implementation effectiveness: 10% 
• Quality of presentation (e.g., appropriate use of graphical aids and referencing): 5%