Week 2 – BBC Digital Media Initiative Case Analysis Ungraded, 25 Possible Points
Using the following case from Information Technology for Managers (2nd ed.),
Do the following in this week’s case discussion forum:
- Collaborate with your peers in this week’s case discussion forum to research the capabilities of digital asset management software.
- Research and share examples of top-rated digital asset management software products?
- Identify who is using this software.
This is an opportunity for you to share your own experiences with these products as well. This collaborative research activity should provide you the foundation you’ll need to conduct your analysis of the case.
Then, answer the following (case questions):
- Share your analysis: Given the NAO’s findings and what you now know about available off-the-shelf products, would it have been wiser for the BBC to adopt a collection of these existing products?
- What actions would be necessary to gain the cooperation of the business units to incorporate this collection of products into their work processes?
Draft a 3-5 page bulleted position paper using what you have learned through collaboration, your own independent research, and the application of this week’s topics to answer the case questions posed above as a starting point of your analysis.. Be sure to address all points of this assignment in your final paper (summary of the central issue, analysis, and recommendations) and cite your work appropriately using APA formatted citations and include a references page.
View RubricCase Study RubricCase Study RubricCriteriaRatingsPtsUnderstandingview longer description5 ptsExceptional: Demonstrates a sophisticated understanding of the topic(s) and issue(s)4 ptsGood: Demonstrates an accomplished understanding of the topic(s) and issue(s)3 ptsFair: Demonstrates an acceptable sophisticated understanding of the topic(s) and issue(s)2 ptsPoor: Demonstrates an inadequate understanding of the topic(s) and issue(s)0 pts/ 5 ptsAnalysisview longer description5 ptsExceptional: Makes appropriate and powerful connections between the issues identified and the strategic concepts studied in the reading4 ptsGood: Makes appropriate connections between the issues identified and the strategic concepts studied in the reading3 ptsFair: Makes appropriate but somewhat vague connections between the issues and concepts studied in the reading2 ptsPoor: Makes little or no connection between the issues identified and the strategic concepts studied in the reading0 pts/ 5 ptsRecommendationsview longer description10 ptsExceptional: Presents detailed, realistic, and appropriate recommendations clearly supported by the information presented and concepts from the reading8 ptsGood: Presents specific, realistic, and appropriate recommendationssupported by the information presented and concepts from the reading6 ptsFair: Presents realistic or appropriate recommendations supported by the information presented and concepts from the reading4 ptsPoor: Presents realistic or appropriate recommendations with little, if any, support from the information presented and concepts from the reading0 pts/ 10 ptsUse and Quality of Referencesview longer description5 ptsAll reliable authorities.4 ptsMost are reliable authorities.3 ptsSome are reliable authorities2 ptsNone are reliable authorities0 pts/ 5 ptsTotal Points: 0
Choose a submission type
Submission type Upload, currently selectedUploadMore submission optionsMoreSubmit file using WebcamWebcamSubmit file using Canvas FilesCanvas Files