M. S.

Sodhi

Group Coursework
Group: Group-members’ names
RE: Learnings from our group’s individual coursework submissions
DT: <date>
Overall, our discussions on the preliminary project submissions of the individual group members
helped us collectively understand the strengths and areas of improvements for each of our projects.
The 5 projects were as follows:
<Project 1> was for process improvement and automation in financial services sector aiming to
improve vehicle recovery rates
<Project 2> was for __ in __ sector aiming to improve …
<Project 3> was for __ in __ sector aiming to improve …
<Project 4> was for __ in __ sector aiming to improve …
<Project 5> was for __ in __ sector aiming to improve …
For this coursework, we only evaluated the preliminary submissions and whatever we could infer in
group discussions, with the aim of strengthening all our final submissions.

1. Why improve the current situation

Overall, the business case was clearly presented. Also, the underlying operational case was clear. Still,
we identified scopes for improvement
Overall, we drew the following lessons: (1) …. (2) … (3) …

Project Strengths and weaknesses re: Strengths and weaknesses re:

business case for operational challenges
improvement

Project 1 Strengths: Strengths:

The business case clearly
highlights the business
situation, the rationale for
change and the merits of such a
change
Weakness:
The business case could have
more details on the numbers
shared and how the business
could achieve them
The limitation of the current
process, along with the manner
in which it can be changed has
been clearly articulated. The
bottlenecks and inefficiencies
of the process are clear in the
write-up
Weakness:
The operational challenges
lack details on roadblocks for
change and possible risks
associated with process
transformation

1
 M. S. Sodhi

2. Scope and process being targeted for improvement

The respective scopes we proposed were clear We also saw what was not included, making the
proposed scope clearer. Overall, we found that there were some areas of improvement. As such, some
of us were able to revisit our scope/process

Project Strengths and weaknesses re: Strengths and weaknesses re:

selected scope process targeted

Project 1 Strength: Strength:

The scope targeted has been
clearly defined with clear
articulation of what is in scope
and what is out of scope. The
scope focuses on internal
operations of the firm and
therefore the firm a high
degree of control on the scope.
Weakness:
There could be potential room
for scope enhancement,
including other lines of
business, which have not been
commented on in the document
The process being targeted
hasn’t been revamped for a
long time and therefore
provides high value creation
opportunity. Additionally, the
process provides opportunity
for phased rollout gives that in
cuts across multiple agents
Weakness:
The process and associated will
require a high number of tech
resources and therefore may
face roadblocks in execution

3. Measurable objectives being targeted

The respective measurable objectives were generally clear as were the current and target values.
Overall, we found that the objectives tied well to the intended area of improvement.

Project Strengths and weaknesses re: Comments on current (‘as

the measurable objectives is’) and future (‘to be’)
being targeted values being presented

Project 1 Strengths: Strengths:

The measurable objectives
cover comprehensively all
aspects of the performance of
the change – speed,
effectiveness and cost. There
clearly defined what is to be
The description of the “as-is”
and “to-be” state clearly
qualifies what the project aims
to achieve. It highlights the
how the different areas of the
business will be impacted due

2

measured to quantify the
impact of the strategy
Weakness:
The project has both cost and
loss side impacts. While the
cost side impact has a direct
dollar measure in the
objectives, the loss side lacks a
dollar figure.
4. Analysis and results
Project Type of analysis done or
proposed and how
compelling it is
Project 1 NA
5. Recommendations and next steps
Project Recommendations (or
alternatives) and how
compelling these are
Project 1 NA
M. S. Sodhi
to the project
Weakness:
The description of the “as-in”
and “to-be” states are
qualitative in nature. Some
amount of quantification would
provide a more comprehensive
understanding of the impact of
the project.
Preliminary results and how
compelling these are…would
you be able to make
actionable recommendations
with these results?
Preliminary Proposal does not
highlight details on analysis
and results. This will be taken
up during the final submission
for the proposal
Clarity and feasibility of next
steps…and how reasonable
do these appear
Preliminary Proposal does not
highlight details on
recommendations and next
steps. This will be taken up
during the final submission for
the proposal