Student Engagement Solution - Griffith University - Case Study Example

Student’s Name: Instructor’s Name: Course Code & Name: Word count: 1,797 Date of Submission: COVER LETTER DR. JOHN CARSON, CEO VIBRANT BUSINESS ANALYST CONSULTANT, P.O BOX 30-0001, NEW CANBERRA, FLOOR 6 250 WANDALOO BUILDING. 16TH September 2014 To: Board of Governance Griffith University, P.O BOX Dear board member, REF: Solution scope and business case I submit herewith the business solution scope and business case to board ahead of University business requirement review held 30th October, 2014. The material acts as guideline as we wait for our meeting which is based on identification of business solution student engagement with the university. For any enquiries relating to the acquisition and transmission, contact me on johncarson@gmail.com.Your effort in planning for the meeting highly appreciated. Thank you in advance. Sincerely, John Carson, CEO Vibrant Executive summary The major component purpose of any business is achievement of the set objective or the goals in which the business is build around. Therefore, it is important to analyze the requirements for the management in order to always ensure service delivery is up to standard. Under requirement analysis, we are able to develop solution scope which guides the management in giving better services to its clients. This report therefore looks at analysis of the management requirements in enhancing student engagement in the institution as major stakeholders of Griffith University. Table of Contents COVER LETTER 2 Executive summary 3 1.0 Introduction 1 2.0 Approaches to Requirements Management 1 3.0 Solution Scope and Business Case 2 3.1 Problem statement 2 3.2 Solution scope 2 3.3 Assumption and constraints 3 3.4 Benefits and risk 4 4.0 Requirements analysis 5 4.1 Business requirements 5 4.2 Stakeholder requirements 6 4.3 Functional requirements 6 4.4 Non-functional requirements 6 5.0 Conclusion 7 REFERENCE 7 Appendices 9 Appendix 1: Chain of command 9 Appendix 2: Input-Output analysis 10 1.0 Introduction Developing Griffith University business solution scope helps in identification of new or improving business capabilities to adjust to market trend. Through management requirement Analysis University will be able to increases or improves service delivery and increases business productivity and enabling high chances of creating a sustainable business relationship between customer and the business (Jonasson, 2013). Solution scope is therefore, crucial in business stakeholder analysis according to Business Analysis Body of Knowledge since it is the reasons behind business continuity. This report therefore, takes student engagement perspective that is between the students and staff relationship within Griffith University. Student engagement involves channel of communication between students and administration, resource sharing between the students, academic and recreational activities that improves cohesion as they work towards a major course of upholding the name of the university. This report therefore identifies management requirements of improving current students’ engagement in the school as part of the stakeholders of Griffith University. 2.0 Approaches to Requirements Management The objective of this report is to improve the current student engagement as part of Griffith stakeholders through identification of conditions or requisite that needs to be taken into consideration in accomplishment of this given objective (Jonasson, 2013). The recommended approach in requirement management to Griffith University is based in two phase. First, management will be required to develop probable business solution scope that is on input stage for example chain of command of command in communication within the school with regard to chain of authority or clarifying places within the school to which students can report their grievances. Secondly, Griffith should put in place control mechanisms to track performance of implemented solution scope then correct deviations identified for example on above case on chain of command, barriers in channel of communication should be identified and corrected or eliminated in order to get clear results of the solution scope implemented (Jonasson, 2013). In developing requirement management for student engagement in Griffith University, will take four major steps which include solution scope management that involves feasibility of the solution brought forward to address business need requirement as the starting point. Secondly, conflict issue in the management in converging stakeholders perspectives, thirdly, requirement review which aims at correction of small errors and lastly, approval those responsible (Brennan, 2009). 3.0 Solution Scope and Business Case Griffith University Solution scope and business case lies in improvement of student engagement in school due to rising cases of negative discussion about Griffith and rise of disciplinary cases. 3.1 Problem statement Griffiths University has recently seen rise in the number of disciplinary cases and negative discussions on university management this is according to the students’ leader body. The major area of complain is the management reluctance on giving feedback on certain issues raised by the students and students awareness on the disciplinary measures stipulated by university management such as disciplinary measures on exams irregularities or rowdy behavior among students. The impact on lack of enough student engagement by management is great since it can result to decrease in University reputation due to poor customer handling, strikes and destruction of property which sums up to decrease in student enrollment and decrease in quality of the student released to corporate world. The need must be addressed before situation getting out of hand since it is still in early stages and can be easily solved or controlled. 3.2 Solution scope Developing solution scope is important to Griffith University in ensuring that university maintains the pace of its competitors in the market at the same time meeting consumer and needs of other stakeholder such as employers. The overall outcome of solution addressed by the university being increased student satisfaction and reduction of disciplinary cases forwarded to relevant authorities due to improved adherence of the school disciplinary guidelines. The table below summarizes solution scope; Target area Action Results Policy formulation engagement Involving students in formulation of some of the university policy through Griffith students’ leadership body as a platform to collect views from students. It increases student’s involvement with university since they are actively involved in making some of the decision this reduce students breaking the laws of the university. It improves university reputation due to positive talks and recommendation of the university by the students both inside and outside the university Students Carry out campaigns on students disciplinary requirements through posters, university website and social media platform Increase students awareness on what management expect them to behave within university to reduce disciplinary cases and any punishment to disciplinary case will be justifiable Channel of communication Establishing a flow chart showing how information should flow within institution and availing it to students on notice boards and university website. The receivers of message will be required to provide feedback within two working days to the sender(students) It increases students’ cooperation in reporting discrepancies instead of rioting or having negative conversation. It increases students’ faith to the management in taking care of their needs through rapid response. Staff Training on customer service delivery Increase quality of services delivered to students in order to reduce cases of harsh treatment by members of staff to students which is one of the greatest causes of students’ dissatisfaction in the university. Table1: scope solution 3.3 Assumption and constraints The above solution scope was prepared having certain assumption and constrains that will be experienced in implementation process and its success. The table below shows outlines assumptions and constrain of each action taken in improving students engagement in Griffith University; Assumptions and constraint table Action Assumptions Constraint Student involvement in policy formulation All the suggestion brought forward will be within university solution scope. Solution brought by a section of students is representative of all the students. Policy brought forward may be out of scope and disregard might cause relationship break down between students and management. The policy may only favor a section of students e.g. those in leadership thus dissatisfaction. Disciplinary awareness campaign It will reach all the students in the university Most students don’t read notice or take time to understand message conveyed that limit the effectiveness of the message. Clarity on channel of communication It will be understood and implemented by those responsible It might be misunderstood for example reporting a problem directly to vice-chancellor instead of utilizing university deans Staff training The trained staff will implement what they have learnt in responding to students needs Students’ need is dynamic and thus requires new methods to solve them each time it arises. Thus training may not be helpful but staff attitude need to useful. Table 2: Assumptions and constraint 3.4 Benefits and risk Griffith University student engagement improvement project has its own benefits and risks just like any other business venture. This is realized in the development and implementation of any business solution. The table below outlines benefits and risk associated in solving above management requirement of student engagement; Benefits and risk table Action Benefit Risk Student involvement in policy formulation Improves students attitude towards university and improve university reputation It can lead to protest if certain views are not taken into account Disciplinary awareness campaign When students are more aware of the rules governing the institution they become free and friendly to management thus enhancing student-management relationship. Improper development of codes and rules governing the university might have loopholes thus increasing risk of students capitalizing on such loopholes Clarity on channel of communication Clear communication ensures correct information and feedback in Griffith University thus any problem arising is solved quickly. Any breakdown of communication in the channel results to dire consequence to the institution due to failure to address a given need within required time. Staff training This will increase students’ satisfaction thus enhancing university reputation due to high quality student engagement. The training might not change attitude of some staff thus failure to achieve desired goal. Table 3: Benefits and risk 4.0 Requirements analysis Requirement analysis involves keen or close look on the needs required by the university in improving its service delivery on student engagement. The consideration taken on requirement analysis will take four major components that include business requirements, stakeholder requirements, functional requirements and non-functional requirements i(Brennan, 2009). The above requirement components are analyzed as follows, 4.1 Business requirements The above suggested business solution have been identified according to their priority of desired effects in order to enhance service delivery by having; Sound policies governing the university that looks into students affairs. Ensuring effective and efficient channel of communication to solve any rising issues. Improve customer service delivery through staff training. Enhancing University reputation both internal and external through positive discussion about Griffith by the students. The actions taken by the management in delivering solutions on student engagement problem are prioritized basing on three basis that is; Urgency- Disciplinary awareness campaign is urgent and therefore, needed to be implemented right away. Difficulty- Student engagement in policy making showed to be difficult due to increased deviation or opinion between management and students so will consider it to be the second last measure to implement. Just after clarity on channel of communication. Cost- Staff training is costly therefore, it need to be done after allocation of money towards staff training. 4.2 Stakeholder requirements Students are the major stakeholders to be given priority in establishing healthy student engagement environment. The requirement for the stakeholders is to ensure that they are conversant in university rules, participate in policy formulation and feedback to be given within four working days. 4.3 Functional requirements Functional analysis since it enables one to describe information and behavior of the business that will bring desired solution to the business. It is stipulated in the table below; Functional requirement table Name that prescribe project Student engagement solution Scenario Disciplinary awareness and students loyalty to university Actors Students, student leaders and staff Preconditions One must be student of Griffith University Post-condition Students-management relationship and commitment toward desired goal. Table 4: functional requirements 4.4 Non-functional requirements The non-functional requirements analysis will need to rely on the below stated statement with most probable questions that need to be carefully analyzed. This includes; Desirability of the outcome after implementation for example if the training for staff will ensure quality service delivery in the university or it is just waste of resources. The efficiency of measures, for example are going to bring instant change on student-management relationship within the university. Accountability- This involves ability to measure the extent of effects brought by the implementation of developed solutions. 5.0 Conclusion Student engagement solution is core to Griffith University which one of the largest university in Australia since large organizations are mostly attributed to low quality service. Therefore, the identification and addresses of the university management requirement on student engagement is core in ensuring customer satisfaction and improved university reputation. REFERENCE Brennan, K. (2009). A guide to the Business analysis body of knowledge (BABOK guide). 1st ed. Toronto: International Institute of Business Analysis. Cadle, J., Eva, M., Hindle, K., Paul, D., Rollason, C., Turner, P., Yeates, D. and Cadle, J. (2014). Business Analysis. 1st ed. Swindon: BCS Learning & Development Limited. Davis, B. (2009). 97 Things Every Project Manager Should Know. 1st ed. Sebastopol: O'Reilly Media, Inc. Davis, W. (1994). Business systems analysis and design. 1st ed. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth Pub. Co. de la Vara, J. and S\'anchez, J. (2008). Improving requirements analysis through business process modelling: A participative approach. pp.165--176. Eskerod, P. and Jepsen, A. (2013). Project stakeholder management. 1st ed. Farnham, Surrey, England: Gower. Hailes, J. and Newton, S. (2014). Business Analysis Based on BABOK® Guide Version 2. 1st ed. Zaltbommel: Van Haren Publishing. Hay, D. (2003). Requirements Analysis. 1st ed. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall PTR. Jonasson, H. (2013). Determining project requirements. 1st ed. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press. Larson, R. and Larson, E. (2009). CBAP certification study guide. 1st ed. Minneapolis, MN: Watermark Learning. Mirbel, I. and de Rivieres, V. (2003). Conciliating user interface and business domain analysis and design. Springer, pp.383--399. Misra, S., Kumar, U. and Kumar, V. (2008). Modelling strategic actor relationships for risk management in organizations undergoing business process reengineering due to information systems adoption. Business Process Management Journal, 14(1), pp.65--84. Ramirez, R. (1999). Stakeholder analysis and conflict management. Cultivating peace: conflict and collaboration in natural resource management, pp.101--126. Ray, L. (2008). Requirement for knowledge management: business driving information technology. Journal of knowledge management, 12(3), pp.156--168. Schindhelm, R. (2012). Cooperative systems Stakeholder analysis. 1st ed. Bremerhaven: Wirtschaftsverlag N. W. Verlag für neue Wissenschaft. Sch\"onberger, A., Wilms, C. and Wirtz, G. (2009). A requirements analysis of Business-to-Business integration. Shen, H., Wall, B., Zaremba, M., Chen, Y. and Browne, J. (2004). Integration of business modelling methods for enterprise information system analysis and user requirements gathering. Computers in Industry, 54(3), pp.307--323. Sousa, K., Mendon\cca, H. and Vanderdonckt, J. (2010). A rule-based approach for model management in a user interface--business alignment framework. Springer, pp.1--14. Stead, B. (1978). A content analysis of the Journal of Business Communication: Toward a body of knowledge. Journal of Business Communication, 15(2), pp.45--51. Weese, S. and Wagner, T. (2011). CBAP / CCBA. 1st ed. Indianapolis, IN: Wiley Pub. Appendices Appendix 1: Chain of command Note: Authority flows downwards Appendix 2: Input-Output analysis Read More