Advance Supply Chain Management

Advance Supply Chain Management

Description:

Students are asked to investigate one topic related to the fast and slow of humanitarian relief supply chain management. The topic of investigation should be fairly narrow in scope, and not a comprehensive review. Students may choose the sub-topic and scope, but this choice should to allow for the necessary depth. The topic can be selected as per students’ familiarity with relevant cases. You can see an example of how these interactions occur in this article.

Some examples sub-topics include:

  • Matching supply chain speed to disaster speed of onset
  • Managing bottlenecks across different stages in the Humanitarian Relief Supply Chain
  • Alternative approaches to Humanitarian Relief Supply Chains based on type of disaster
  • Coordination among governments and non-government agencies in delivery of aid
  • Matching aid type to affected populations implications for Humanitarian Relief Supply Chains

Examples used in the report can range due to personal backgrounds and theoretical interest of the individual students. Each topic requires to be well researched both from a theoretical point of view and practical applications. It is imperative that your topic is well described (inclusive of real world examples), and that the selection of theoretical area is well justified.

The marking criteria is as follows:

  1. Analyses a business context to identify issues and define problems (20%): The specific sub-topic chosen by the student is clearly identified and justified.
  2. Collects reference material, information, and data (20%): The topic is well researched, using peer-reviewed literature from journals from top journals in the field of supply chain management. Data are supplied (if relevant).
  3. Data analyzed (30%): Information about case examples, relevant to the topic are included and well explained. Cases are relevant and well justified.
  4. Provides examples demonstrating practices, principles or theories to arrive at logical conclusions (30%): Evidence of a clear, innovative argument about how the case studies relate to the theory and how this applies to everyday supply chain management.

Leave a Reply