Executive Solution Overview
[>Management homework help](https://www.sweetstudy.com/fields/business-finance-management) file below 2000 words table of contents must **files (1)** – ## BBABM312_AB2.pdf **## BBABM312_AB2.pdf** ASSESSMENT BRIEF BBABM312 DECISION ANALYSIS (5 ECTS) Academic year 2025/26 Semester/Term Fall Professo…
Instant Solution Download
$6.99Immediate access to the full model answer, formatted citations, and rubric breakdown.
Need a Fresh Custom Paper?
Have this question answered from scratch according to your specific instructions and deadline.
Order on TutorsGallery →Assignment Prompt & Instructions
[>Management homework help](https://www.sweetstudy.com/fields/business-finance-management)
file below
2000 words
table of contents must
**files (1)**
– ## BBABM312_AB2.pdf
**## BBABM312_AB2.pdf**
ASSESSMENT BRIEF
BBABM312 DECISION ANALYSIS (5 ECTS)
Academic year 2025/26
Semester/Term Fall
Professor Vasileios Myrthianos – Rohan Otto
Participation in all assessment activities stated in this document is required. The minimum pass grade for the course is
70. Due dates and times are always in Geneva time. Unless otherwise stated, the submission point for Turnitin
activities will open exactly 10 days before the deadline.
MINOR ASSESSMENTS
Task 2.1: Quiz on Lessons 5 and 6
Assessment type: Quiz
Due date: 5 Dec. 25 (14:00)
Weight: 5%
Description: Multiple choice quiz on Lessons 5 and 6.
Duration: 30 minutes, 1 attempt.
Task 2.2: Quiz on Lessons 7 to 10
Assessment type: Quiz
Due date: 19 Dec. 25 (14:00)
Weight: 5%
Description: Multiple choice quiz on Lessons 7 to 10.
Duration: 30 minutes, 1 attempt.
FINAL ASSESSMENT
Task 2.3: Final Assignment
Assessment type: Written assignment
Due date: 26 Jan. 26 (14:00)
Weight: 50%
Description: Students are to answer and analyse the
questions regarding the provided case study.
Go to the next page
ASSESSMENT BRIEF
INSTRUCTIONS
Case Study: EcoRide Mobility
Background: EcoRide Mobility is a growing company specializing in electric bicycles and scooters for urban
commuters. Over the past decade, the company has built a reputation for affordable, eco-friendly transportation
solutions. However, increased competition, rising battery costs, and stricter safety regulations are affecting its
profitability.
Current Situation: EcoRide is considering expanding into electric delivery vehicles for businesses, as demand for last-
mile logistics solutions is increasing. However, entering this market requires significant investment, infrastructure
adjustments, and navigating strict regulatory requirements. The company also faces uncertainty about how quickly
businesses will adopt eco-friendly delivery solutions.
The management team at EcoRide must decide whether to invest in the new electric delivery vehicle line, form
partnerships with courier companies to share risks and costs or pause expansion plans and strengthen their core e-
bike and scooter business.
Questions:
Question 1: Decision-Making Framework
• Part A: Using the six elements of decision quality discussed in Unit 1, evaluate the decision EcoRide is facing.
Identify and explain how each element applies to this case, highlighting any areas where EcoRide may need
to improve its decision-making process.
• Part B: Discuss how EcoRide’s organizational decision-making systems, as explored in Unit 2, might influence
the outcome of this decision. Consider factors such as leadership style, corporate culture, and communication
channels.
Question 2: Problem Structuring
• Part A: Define the problem EcoRide is trying to solve with the expantion into electric delivery vehicles. Discuss
the scope of the problem and identify the key objectives that EcoRide should consider.
• Part B: Propose at least three feasible alternatives EcoRide could pursue in response to this decision
problem. Justify each alternative by explaining how it aligns with the company’s overall goals and market
position.
Question 3: Decision Analysis Tools
• Part A: Explain how EcoRide can use decision trees to analyze the potential outcomes of investing in the new
electric delivery vehicle line versus partnerships or pausing expansion plans.
• Part B: Create a decision tree that outlines these alternatives, including potential risks, rewards, and
probabilities. Clearly label each branch and decision node.
Question 4: Scenario Planning
• Develop a scenario plan for EcoRide that considers different future market conditions. Create at least two
scenarios—one optimistic and one pessimistic—and outline the strategic responses EcoRide should consider
for each scenario. Discuss how these scenarios can help EcoRide manage uncertainty in its decision-making
process.
Question 5: Influence Diagram
• Create an influence diagram that represents the decision-making process EcoRide should follow for the new
investment strategy. Identify key variables, such as market demand, regulatory changes, and technological
advancements, and show how they influence each other and the final decision.
Question 6: Risk and Uncertainty Management
• Part A: Discuss the role of risk and uncertainty in EcoRide’s decision-making process. Identify and explain the
key sources of uncertainty and risk for the new investment strategy.
ASSESSMENT BRIEF
• Part B: Propose strategies EcoRide could use to manage these risks, incorporating concepts from Unit 6
(probabilistic thinking) and Unit 8 (risk management). Include recommendations on how to mitigate the impact
of these risks on the company’s decision.
Question 7: Stakeholder Analysis
• Conduct a stakeholder analysis for EcoRide’s potential investment strategy. Identify the key stakeholders
involved, including customers, suppliers, regulators, and internal teams. Discuss how the interests and
influences of these stakeholders should be considered in EcoRide’s decision-making process.
Question 8: Final Decision and Justification
• Based on your analysis from the previous questions, make a final recommendation on whether EcoRide
should proceed with the investment into the new electric delivery vehicle line. Justify your decision by
integrating insights from all the units covered in this course, emphasizing decision quality, stakeholder
considerations, and risk management.
FORMAT
Your submission must meet the following formatting requirements:
• Number of files for submission: 1
• Required file format for main submission: PDF
• Word count: 2000
All refencing and citations require Harvard referencing style. Students must avoid plagiarism and use the Harvard
Referencing Guide and Turnitin to ensure that their sources are correctly cited. Plagiarism includes the use of artificial
intelligence tools, such as ChatGPT and Grammarly, when output is copied and pasted from these sites. Please refer
to the Academic Policies and Procedures Manual and the Student Good Practice Manual in AI Literacy available
on the Student Services page for further details.
Go to the next page.
ASSESSMENT BRIEF
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
Written
Assignment
Fail
0-59%
Borderline fail
60-69%
Fair
70-79%
Good
80-89%
Exceptional
90-100%
Purpose,
Understanding &
Content
25%
Purpose is unclear or
absent. The work
demonstrates serious
misunderstandings or
confusion regarding key
concepts. Content lacks
relevance or depth, and
arguments are either
missing or unsupported
by evidence.
An attempt is made to
address the task, but the
purpose is vague or
inconsistently applied.
Some relevant concepts
are included, but analysis
is weak or descriptive. Key
ideas may be misapplied
or underdeveloped.
The purpose is mostly
clear and appropriate to
the level. Demonstrates a
competent grasp of the
topic, though some gaps in
understanding may
remain. Arguments are
generally supported, with
limited but relevant
insight.
Clear, coherent and well-
supported purpose.
Demonstrates strong
conceptual
understanding and the
ability to apply
knowledge with
increasing independence.
Arguments are logical
and appropriately
evidenced.
Purpose is focused and
intellectually engaging.
Demonstrates excellent
understanding and
thoughtful application of
complex ideas. Content is
accurate, nuanced, and
supported by robust
evidence. Analytical
insight is sustained
throughout.
Organisation &
Coherence
20%
Lacks logical
progression. Paragraphs
or sections are
disconnected or poorly
ordered. No clear
introduction or
conclusion. Difficult to
follow.
Basic structure is
present but
inconsistently applied.
Sections may be
repetitive or misaligned.
Transitions are weak,
and flow is uneven.
Organisational structure
is sound, with clear
sections. Flow may be
occasionally awkward,
but the reader can
generally follow the
argument.
Well-organised and
coherent. Each section
contributes to a logical
progression of ideas.
Transitions are
smooth, and the
structure enhances
clarity.
Structure is
sophisticated and
purposeful, guiding the
reader through a well-
crafted argument.
Transitions are
seamless, and the
organisation enhances
impact. Introduction
and conclusion are
incisive and effective.
Communication &
Expression
15%
Communication is
ineffective, with
frequent language or
structural errors that
obscure meaning. Tone
is inappropriate for
academic work.
Meaning is occasionally
unclear due to language
issues or lack of fluency.
Academic tone is
inconsistently applied.
Written or spoken
delivery lacks
confidence or clarity.
Communication is
mostly clear and
appropriate, though
occasional language
issues or stylistic
lapses may affect
readability. Generally
suitable academic
tone.
Clear and fluent
academic
communication with
only minor errors. Style
is professional and
well-suited to the
discipline. Oral delivery
is confident and
articulate.
Language is precise,
fluent, and engaging.
Tone and style are
highly appropriate,
demonstrating
command of academic
discourse. Oral or
written communication
is confident, polished,
and compelling.
Authenticity, Critical
Thinking &
Integration
20%
No critical thinking or
originality is evident.
Work relies on
description or
unexamined ideas.
Ideas are not connected
or developed. No
synthesis or evaluation.
Some attempt at
original thought, but
arguments are basic and
underdeveloped. Little
engagement with
opposing perspectives.
Connections between
ideas are weak.
Shows evidence of
critical thinking and
evaluation. Some
original insights and
attempts to synthesise
ideas are present but
not fully developed or
consistently
maintained.
Demonstrates
thoughtful, analytical
engagement. Critical
perspectives are
explored, and
independent
judgement is evident.
Good integration of
ideas from various
sources.
Original, reflective, and
critically sophisticated.
Demonstrates synthesis
across concepts,
sources, or
frameworks. Offers
compelling, well-
argued insights
supported by evidence
and evaluation.
Use of Sources &
Referencing
20%
Uses few or no
appropriate sources.
Citations may be absent
or incorrectly
formatted. Work may
contain plagiarism or
demonstrate poor
academic integrity.
Some attempt to use
sources, but integration
is weak or
inappropriate.
Referencing is
inconsistent and may
include significant
formatting errors.
Relevant sources are
used, but not always
effectively integrated.
Citation style is mostly
accurate, though some
inconsistencies may be
present. Limited
engagement with the
source material.
Uses a good range of
credible, relevant
sources. Referencing is
accurate and enhances
the credibility of
arguments. Shows
clear understanding of
academic practice.
Sources are expertly
chosen, critically
evaluated, and
integrated seamlessly.
Referencing is precise
and fully compliant
with academic
conventions.
Demonstrates deep
engagement with
scholarly material.
– INSTRUCTIONS
– FORMAT
– ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
**## BBABM312_AB2.pdf**
ASSESSMENT BRIEF
BBABM312 DECISION ANALYSIS (5 ECTS)
Academic year 2025/26
Semester/Term Fall
Professor Vasileios Myrthianos – Rohan Otto
Participation in all assessment activities stated in this document is required. The minimum pass grade for the course is
70. Due dates and times are always in Geneva time. Unless otherwise stated, the submission point for Turnitin
activities will open exactly 10 days before the deadline.
MINOR ASSESSMENTS
Task 2.1: Quiz on Lessons 5 and 6
Assessment type: Quiz
Due date: 5 Dec. 25 (14:00)
Weight: 5%
Description: Multiple choice quiz on Lessons 5 and 6.
Duration: 30 minutes, 1 attempt.
Task 2.2: Quiz on Lessons 7 to 10
Assessment type: Quiz
Due date: 19 Dec. 25 (14:00)
Weight: 5%
Description: Multiple choice quiz on Lessons 7 to 10.
Duration: 30 minutes, 1 attempt.
FINAL ASSESSMENT
Task 2.3: Final Assignment
Assessment type: Written assignment
Due date: 26 Jan. 26 (14:00)
Weight: 50%
Description: Students are to answer and analyse the
questions regarding the provided case study.
Go to the next page
ASSESSMENT BRIEF
INSTRUCTIONS
Case Study: EcoRide Mobility
Background: EcoRide Mobility is a growing company specializing in electric bicycles and scooters for urban
commuters. Over the past decade, the company has built a reputation for affordable, eco-friendly transportation
solutions. However, increased competition, rising battery costs, and stricter safety regulations are affecting its
profitability.
Current Situation: EcoRide is considering expanding into electric delivery vehicles for businesses, as demand for last-
mile logistics solutions is increasing. However, entering this market requires significant investment, infrastructure
adjustments, and navigating strict regulatory requirements. The company also faces uncertainty about how quickly
businesses will adopt eco-friendly delivery solutions.
The management team at EcoRide must decide whether to invest in the new electric delivery vehicle line, form
partnerships with courier companies to share risks and costs or pause expansion plans and strengthen their core e-
bike and scooter business.
Questions:
Question 1: Decision-Making Framework
• Part A: Using the six elements of decision quality discussed in Unit 1, evaluate the decision EcoRide is facing.
Identify and explain how each element applies to this case, highlighting any areas where EcoRide may need
to improve its decision-making process.
• Part B: Discuss how EcoRide’s organizational decision-making systems, as explored in Unit 2, might influence
the outcome of this decision. Consider factors such as leadership style, corporate culture, and communication
channels.
Question 2: Problem Structuring
• Part A: Define the problem EcoRide is trying to solve with the expantion into electric delivery vehicles. Discuss
the scope of the problem and identify the key objectives that EcoRide should consider.
• Part B: Propose at least three feasible alternatives EcoRide could pursue in response to this decision
problem. Justify each alternative by explaining how it aligns with the company’s overall goals and market
position.
Question 3: Decision Analysis Tools
• Part A: Explain how EcoRide can use decision trees to analyze the potential outcomes of investing in the new
electric delivery vehicle line versus partnerships or pausing expansion plans.
• Part B: Create a decision tree that outlines these alternatives, including potential risks, rewards, and
probabilities. Clearly label each branch and decision node.
Question 4: Scenario Planning
• Develop a scenario plan for EcoRide that considers different future market conditions. Create at least two
scenarios—one optimistic and one pessimistic—and outline the strategic responses EcoRide should consider
for each scenario. Discuss how these scenarios can help EcoRide manage uncertainty in its decision-making
process.
Question 5: Influence Diagram
• Create an influence diagram that represents the decision-making process EcoRide should follow for the new
investment strategy. Identify key variables, such as market demand, regulatory changes, and technological
advancements, and show how they influence each other and the final decision.
Question 6: Risk and Uncertainty Management
• Part A: Discuss the role of risk and uncertainty in EcoRide’s decision-making process. Identify and explain the
key sources of uncertainty and risk for the new investment strategy.
ASSESSMENT BRIEF
• Part B: Propose strategies EcoRide could use to manage these risks, incorporating concepts from Unit 6
(probabilistic thinking) and Unit 8 (risk management). Include recommendations on how to mitigate the impact
of these risks on the company’s decision.
Question 7: Stakeholder Analysis
• Conduct a stakeholder analysis for EcoRide’s potential investment strategy. Identify the key stakeholders
involved, including customers, suppliers, regulators, and internal teams. Discuss how the interests and
influences of these stakeholders should be considered in EcoRide’s decision-making process.
Question 8: Final Decision and Justification
• Based on your analysis from the previous questions, make a final recommendation on whether EcoRide
should proceed with the investment into the new electric delivery vehicle line. Justify your decision by
integrating insights from all the units covered in this course, emphasizing decision quality, stakeholder
considerations, and risk management.
FORMAT
Your submission must meet the following formatting requirements:
• Number of files for submission: 1
• Required file format for main submission: PDF
• Word count: 2000
All refencing and citations require Harvard referencing style. Students must avoid plagiarism and use the Harvard
Referencing Guide and Turnitin to ensure that their sources are correctly cited. Plagiarism includes the use of artificial
intelligence tools, such as ChatGPT and Grammarly, when output is copied and pasted from these sites. Please refer
to the Academic Policies and Procedures Manual and the Student Good Practice Manual in AI Literacy available
on the Student Services page for further details.
Go to the next page.
ASSESSMENT BRIEF
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
Written
Assignment
Fail
0-59%
Borderline fail
60-69%
Fair
70-79%
Good
80-89%
Exceptional
90-100%
Purpose,
Understanding &
Content
25%
Purpose is unclear or
absent. The work
demonstrates serious
misunderstandings or
confusion regarding key
concepts. Content lacks
relevance or depth, and
arguments are either
missing or unsupported
by evidence.
An attempt is made to
address the task, but the
purpose is vague or
inconsistently applied.
Some relevant concepts
are included, but analysis
is weak or descriptive. Key
ideas may be misapplied
or underdeveloped.
The purpose is mostly
clear and appropriate to
the level. Demonstrates a
competent grasp of the
topic, though some gaps in
understanding may
remain. Arguments are
generally supported, with
limited but relevant
insight.
Clear, coherent and well-
supported purpose.
Demonstrates strong
conceptual
understanding and the
ability to apply
knowledge with
increasing independence.
Arguments are logical
and appropriately
evidenced.
Purpose is focused and
intellectually engaging.
Demonstrates excellent
understanding and
thoughtful application of
complex ideas. Content is
accurate, nuanced, and
supported by robust
evidence. Analytical
insight is sustained
throughout.
Organisation &
Coherence
20%
Lacks logical
progression. Paragraphs
or sections are
disconnected or poorly
ordered. No clear
introduction or
conclusion. Difficult to
follow.
Basic structure is
present but
inconsistently applied.
Sections may be
repetitive or misaligned.
Transitions are weak,
and flow is uneven.
Organisational structure
is sound, with clear
sections. Flow may be
occasionally awkward,
but the reader can
generally follow the
argument.
Well-organised and
coherent. Each section
contributes to a logical
progression of ideas.
Transitions are
smooth, and the
structure enhances
clarity.
Structure is
sophisticated and
purposeful, guiding the
reader through a well-
crafted argument.
Transitions are
seamless, and the
organisation enhances
impact. Introduction
and conclusion are
incisive and effective.
Communication &
Expression
15%
Communication is
ineffective, with
frequent language or
structural errors that
obscure meaning. Tone
is inappropriate for
academic work.
Meaning is occasionally
unclear due to language
issues or lack of fluency.
Academic tone is
inconsistently applied.
Written or spoken
delivery lacks
confidence or clarity.
Communication is
mostly clear and
appropriate, though
occasional language
issues or stylistic
lapses may affect
readability. Generally
suitable academic
tone.
Clear and fluent
academic
communication with
only minor errors. Style
is professional and
well-suited to the
discipline. Oral delivery
is confident and
articulate.
Language is precise,
fluent, and engaging.
Tone and style are
highly appropriate,
demonstrating
command of academic
discourse. Oral or
written communication
is confident, polished,
and compelling.
Authenticity, Critical
Thinking &
Integration
20%
No critical thinking or
originality is evident.
Work relies on
description or
unexamined ideas.
Ideas are not connected
or developed. No
synthesis or evaluation.
Some attempt at
original thought, but
arguments are basic and
underdeveloped. Little
engagement with
opposing perspectives.
Connections between
ideas are weak.
Shows evidence of
critical thinking and
evaluation. Some
original insights and
attempts to synthesise
ideas are present but
not fully developed or
consistently
maintained.
Demonstrates
thoughtful, analytical
engagement. Critical
perspectives are
explored, and
independent
judgement is evident.
Good integration of
ideas from various
sources.
Original, reflective, and
critically sophisticated.
Demonstrates synthesis
across concepts,
sources, or
frameworks. Offers
compelling, well-
argued insights
supported by evidence
and evaluation.
Use of Sources &
Referencing
20%
Uses few or no
appropriate sources.
Citations may be absent
or incorrectly
formatted. Work may
contain plagiarism or
demonstrate poor
academic integrity.
Some attempt to use
sources, but integration
is weak or
inappropriate.
Referencing is
inconsistent and may
include significant
formatting errors.
Relevant sources are
used, but not always
effectively integrated.
Citation style is mostly
accurate, though some
inconsistencies may be
present. Limited
engagement with the
source material.
Uses a good range of
credible, relevant
sources. Referencing is
accurate and enhances
the credibility of
arguments. Shows
clear understanding of
academic practice.
Sources are expertly
chosen, critically
evaluated, and
integrated seamlessly.
Referencing is precise
and fully compliant
with academic
conventions.
Demonstrates deep
engagement with
scholarly material.
– INSTRUCTIONS
– FORMAT
– ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
