Individual Project Guidelines

Individual Project Guidelines

Data Analytics Simulation
Winter Intersession (January 2017)

Individual Project Guidelines

The project will be individually based. For the project, each student will choose a business process or decision-making process that he/she is familiar with or can readily understand. Examples may be from any industry (i.e. financial services, retail, transportation, defense contracting, etc.) or business function/process (i.e. HR, procurement, client management, financial analysis, etc.). The student should analyze this process in terms of their understanding of data analytics derived from the process and data analytics simulations. For the Data analytics simulation students will be asked to predict market demand, set the channel price, make formulation decisions, determine promotional spending strategy, and communicate their strategy effectively to their managers. Elements of this type strategic decision-making process can be mirrored for the student project – or the student may deviate as needed from this particular scenario to fit the decision-making process as needed for their particular context of choice. Furthermore, the balanced scorecard shows that there is often an overemphasis on financial metrics, when additional metrics may be equally as important.

For the student project, one should also consider what metrics are truly most important in whatever elements from either simulation are incorporated into the project. Not all of theaspects form the two simulations will necessarily apply appreciably to your particular context. You may also potentially want to discuss certain elements that should avoided in your particular decision-making process. There are tradeoffs in every different process design and decision-making process. There is no “one size fits all” and the business context will drive the choices that are made.

In the analysis, one should also consider how the concepts of the course readings apply to your chosen scenario – this is essential to develop an insightful analysis. For example, the analysis can assess how inter-process synergies (i.e. economies of scope) can come into play (e.g., the Polyface Farms case can serve as a reference) and what managerial implications that are needed or may result due to such synergies.In another example, one can assess how an expert systemcould help aid the understanding of this process. It is not necessary to design a decision tree; however, one could consider how expert system principles could help augment an understanding of the process to organizational decision-makers. The above are simply examples and the discussion may focus more on the aspects from the other readings.

The analysis can be provided via a presentation (Option A) or a write-up (Option B). The content, analysis, and expected level of rigor will essentially be the same – it is really only the medium that is different.

Option A - Presentation:

The presentations will be conducted the last night of class on Tuesday (January 10). For those who choose to conduct a presentation are not required to submit a written analysis. As such the analysis is communication through the student’s narrative. A powerpoint (or similar visual aid)is recommended. The presentation should generally be from 10-15 minutes (in addition to any questions).

Option B–Written Analysis:

For the write-up, students will submit an analysis approximately 2-3 pages in length (single spaced – 12 pt. Times New Roman font). The maximum allowable length is 3 pages but appendices can be included if the student wishes to include supplemental material. The write-up is due on Saturday–January 14(i.e., the weekend after the course instructional period) at 11:59 pm (i.e. midnight). For those who choose to submit a write-up, attendance for the presentations (the last night of class) is not required.

The Grade Breakdown for the project (presentation or write-up) will be as follows:

- Articulation of Ideas (33.3%)

- Application of Process/Data Analytic Principles (33.3%)

- Rigor of Solution (33.3%)

1