Consultancy Practice

Assessment Brief
Academic year and term: 2022/23 – Spring Semester

Module title: Consultancy Practice

Module code: RBP020L010

Module Convener: Dr. Sabine Seeger

Learning outcomes On the completion of this module:

assessed within this
▪ Knowledge outcomes – you will be able to identify different
piece of work as agreed at
the programme level forms, models and current practices in professional services
meeting including a comprehensive understanding of the consultancy
life cycle and associated aspects such scoping of work, scoring
and selection of business partners, stakeholder management,
engagement proposal drafting, presentation, implementation
and post engagement review.
▪ Cognitive skills outcomes – you will be able to demonstrate a
range of cognitive, intellectual, and soft skills together with
competencies specific to consultancy that include problem-
solving and critical analysis.

Type of assessment: Formative Assessment –

Presentation trial-run during the last week of teaching (0%)

Summative Assessment –
1. Individual consultancy case study presentation (slide deck,
speaking notes and recording) (70% weighting)
2. Individual online quiz (30% weighting) - you are required to
complete one multiple-choice quiz online to demonstrate your
knowledge and understanding of theories, concepts and
information included in discover (lecture), explore (self-study)
and share and apply (seminar).

Assessment deadline: Individual Consultancy Case Study Presentation: 19.April 2023

before 2 pm
Online Quiz: Week 8, March 13-19th, timing to be announced
 Individual Online Quiz

Individual online quiz (30% weighting) - you are required to complete one multiple-choice online quiz
to demonstrate your knowledge and understanding of theories, concepts and information included in
discover (lecture), explore (self-study) and share and apply (seminar).

You will be given the opportunity to test software access and quiz functionality a few weeks before the
quiz. Please check the Moodle page which will point out details about the quiz trial-run.

The individual quiz itself will be accessible in week 8 and all material covered so far up this week’s
topic will be included in the quiz.

Detailed instructions on how to access and complete the quiz will be posted on the Moodle page
under the assessment tab.

The objective of the quiz is to test your knowledge and understanding of the module teaching with a
strong emphasis on content posted on the Moodle page and communicated during lecture and
seminars (not explore plus which is optional). If you have actively attended and engaged with lectures,
seminars and the material posted under explore you will need to do very little to no revision.

Individual Consultancy Case Study

Individual consultancy case study analysis and presentation (slide deck, speaking notes and
recording) (70% weighting) – you will be given a range of case study material and data points to be
analysed; specific instructions and tasks will be provided gradually week by week and time will be set
aside for students to work with the case study material during the seminars with seminar tutors
providing on-going formative feedback.

You will be asked to investigate a particular business problem included in the case study and in
response prepare and submit via Moodle Assignment submission box an individually authored
business partnering proposal encompassing a

✓ PowerPoint presentation (template and exemplar will be provided)

✓ including speaking notes (narrative for each PowerPoint slide) and

✓ a PowerPoint recording of your presentation delivery to be uploaded in a separate Moodle

Assignment submission inbox.

Please note: Technical support including tutorial recordings and instructions, will be posted on the
Moodle page.

Please take care when saving the PowerPoint presentation: you need to submit your presentation
and speaking notes as ONE PDF file in the dedicated Moodle Assignment submission box.

The PowerPoint presentation should be at a minimum of 8 slides and a maximum of 15 slides

excluding title slide and reference listing. The presentation needs to be written as a board paper (see
instructions on Moodle) meaning all messages need to be complete and conclusive to the reader.
The speaking notes need to be embedded in the PowerPoint presentation (instructions on the
Moodle page and check tutorial/sample if in doubt) and should not be more than 250-300 words per
slide as well as repeat the content of the slide.

Please note: In-text citation and listing of references need to follow Harvard referencing (see above
title page and reference listing is not included in the maximum slide count).

The PowerPoint recording involves the student recording a verbal narrative taking the audience
[consulting partner] through the PowerPoint presentation. Recordings should be a minimum of 10
minutes and maximum of 15 minutes. Details on how to record, convert and upload the file on Moodle
Assignment are posted on the Moodle page including a technical tutorial.

The case study presentation needs to include the following elements but does not need to follow the
sequence of the bullet points below:

▪ Business problem – understanding of the business issues/problems to be addressed

▪ Proposed approach to address business problem (please note approach and NOT solution)

▪ Deliverables and anticipated outcomes

▪ Project plan

▪ Team

▪ Pricing

▪ Assumptions and risks

▪ Business partnering rationale and qualifications (why should the client hand the project to the
consultancy firm)

Case study material (data sets, notes and other information) will be posted on the Moodle page under
dedicated case study tabs and gradually made accessible to students in line with the weekly teaching
activities. In addition to the material, a step by step is visible on the Moodle page.

In addition to the posted case study material on Moodle, students should make use of all information
posted and shared during the module (lecture notes, explore material and seminar activities) as well
as the learnings from the Module: Problem solving and research methods for managers
RBP020L086 and any other relevant MBA learning. Additional research is encouraged but not
required.
 Case Study Particulars

Please note this is a Fictional Case Study based on a previous case study by Dr. Peter Atkinson

Case Scenario

Roehampton Hospital Trust can look back at a long-standing tradition of providing inclusive healthcare
to local communities across South-West London.

Like many other NHS trusts – Roehampton is a publicly funded hospital, not a private enterprise – the
hospital has been struggling to meet increasing population needs for healthcare and government
targets. Frequent complaints from patients and the families of patients concerning the service being
delivered by the hospital appear to be the primary concerns. Compared to larger teaching trusts,
Roehampton has seen limited funding increases and it is often seen as a second-tier hospital trust.

In 2019/2020 a spate of allegations about the management of the trust emerged in the media
prompting the Secretary of State for Health to take action: a new Chief Executive was eventually
installed. Joshua Brady is known in government circles as the expert in healthcare management and
turning around failing hospital trusts.

New Chief Executive

Joshua Brady took on the role of Chief Executive just six months ago with a clear brief from the
Secretary of State for Health to turn around Roehampton Hospital Trust. On the first day of his new
role, Josh Brady called his good friend Trevor Johnson, who is a senior partner at Surrey Consulting.
Josh and Trevor go back long-time; they were house-mates during their MBA at INSEAD and Trevor
has helped Josh with several tricky assignments.

Josh gives Trevor a summary of the known issues during a long lunch; with so many wide-ranging
issues they conclude only a comprehensive transformation programme will solve the business
problems. Procurement is of course tightly regulated and follows a strict process, for that reason Josh
and Trevor agree on a moderate scoping project within Josh’s authorisation budget to get the ball
rolling.

Transformation Programme on Hold

Four weeks into the scoping project, Josh Brady receives a call from the Secretary of State for Health
who informs him that an investigation is now being conducted by the police into historic allegations of
financial irregularities by a ‘whistleblower’.

Consequently, Josh asks Trevor to put the scoping project for the comprehensive transformation
programme on hold. The Surrey Consulting project manager John Walter wraps up his work and files
all the work in progress documents.

Your Role

You are an MBA graduate who has recently joined Surrey Consulting as a Senior Consultantyou’re
your part of Trevor Johnson’s group.
You have worked for a smaller healthcare service provider for several years prior to your MBA studies
- you are very familiar with the UK public health sector and an expert in business process re-
engineering. You are keen to make a favourable impression and demonstrate to your consulting
partner Trevor that you are ready for a promotion to manager grade in the next six months.

Your Brief

Trevor calls you and colleague of yours, another MBA graduate senior consultant, into his office. He
gives you a summary of the Roehampton Hospital situation (see scenario above) and tells you the
following:

Two months have passed since Josh Brady was informed about the police investigation; there is little
progress but the transformation programme remains on hold.

At the same time senior managers not directly linked to the finance department are getting impatient:
KPIs are declining, and the number of patient complaints are increasing.

Two managers Madeline McCarthy and Sebastian Folkes have separately approached Brady: they
would like to launch separate initiatives to halt the decline and get on top of their most pressing issues.

Last week, John Walter has had a briefing meeting with both Madeline and Sebastian before flying out
to the Thailand to get married.

Your Task

While John is on his honeymoon, Trevor would like you and your colleague to draft a consulting
proposal for each Madeline McCarthy, Chief People Officer, and Sebastian Folkes, Chief Strategy
Officer, respectively.

You are given access to all the relevant client files. Trevor asks you make use of the firm’s pitch
template but warns you that the proposal needs to be tailored to the respective client’s needs and
personality.

You are asked to send the pitch deck and speaking notes to Trevor in advance of a short in-house
pitch presentation. If you impress Trevor, he will ask you to deliver the pitch to the client and co-lead
the project with a senior manager of the firm.

For whom will you prepare the proposal?

Instructions for Individual Case Study Assessment

The individual case study assessment for this module is in the form of a PowerPoint presentation
(template and exemplar will be provided), speaking notes (narrative for each PowerPoint slide) and a
PowerPoint recording of your presentation delivery (uploaded in a dedicated Moodle Assignment
submission inbox). Please view the section above for further specific details

The ask: As outlined in the assignment scenario above, you are required to prepare a consulting
proposal for one of the senior managers of Roehampton Hospital.

To compile the presentation, draft the speaking notes and prepare the recording you are required to
critically analyse the case study narrative and the material (John Walter’s handover documents)
posted on the Moodle page.
Furthermore, you should make use of all information posted and shared during the module (lecture
notes, explore material and seminar activities) as well as the learnings from the Module: Problem
solving and research methods for managers RBP020L086 and any other relevant MBA learning.
Additional research is encouraged but not required.

The grading criteria and their weighting for the assignment are as follows:

Knowledge (understanding of consulting process) 20%

Critical Analysis (problem diagnosis) 25%
Proposal (application of tools and knowledge) 25%
Presentation (clarity, structure, grammar, correct referencing etc.) 30%

You are advised to allocate your efforts accordingly. For more details see the grading criteria grid
(rubric) below.

Presentation and Referencing

Your submission must follow academic best practice with fully referenced sources, in-text citations and
bibliography. Any written work should be spell-checked and a contents page should be included. Do
not use various font sizes and colours, except where deliberate emphasis is appropriate for clarity and
impact.

You MUST use the Harvard System. The Harvard system is very easy to use once you become
familiar with it. To check your Harvard referencing technique go to the Quick Guide via the Library
here: https://library.roehampton.ac.uk/referencing/business and locate the guide for business students
found here:https://library.roehampton.ac.uk/ld.php?content_id=32204575

How will we support you with your assessment?

• There will be assessment briefings and applied exercise throughout the teaching schedule.
• Additional assessment clinics will be conducted during the last week of term, further tutorials
will be recorded and posted on the Moodle page.
• During the last weeks seminar you have the opportunity to present your slides to your seminar
tutor for formative feedback.
• Tips and pointers for the assessment will be highlighted throughout your seminars.
• Weekly advice on scholarly and context specific resources is available through tutor office
hours.
• Upload your draft assignment to Studiosity for improvements on grammar and English writing.
Sign up https://studiosity.com/connect/users/sign_in
• FAQs and other supporting material will be posted on Moodle.

How will your work be assessed?

Your work will be assessed by a subject expert who will use the marking grid provided in this
assessment brief. When you access your marked work it is important that you reflect on the feedback
so that you can use it to improve future assignments.
Assignment submissions

The Business School requires a digital version of all assignment submissions. These must be
submitted via Moodle Assignment submission boxes on the module’s Moodle site.

The PowerPoint presentation and linked speaking notes IN PowerPoint must be submitted as
one PDF file [please follow instructions on Moodle page] and must not include scanned in text
or text boxes.

The PowerPoint recording of the presentation delivery must use the standard PowerPoint functionality
and the file can be uploaded as is to a separate Moodle Assignment submission box.

Both files must be submitted by 2pm on the given date. For further general details on assignment
preparation refer to the online information via Learning Skills Hub
https://moodle.roehampton.ac.uk/course/view.php?id=3700 and contact Academic Achievement
Team in the Library for workshops.

Mitigating circumstances/what to do if you cannot submit a piece of work

The University Mitigating Circumstances Policy can be found on the University website - it’s important
you check the regulations on mitigating circumstances if you find that you cannot submit an
essay: Mitigating Circumstances Policy

Marking and feedback process

Between you handing in your work and then receiving your feedback and marks within 20 days, there
are a number of quality assurance processes that we go through to ensure that students receive
marks which reflects their work. A brief summary is provided below.
• Step One – The module and marking team meet to agree standards, expectations and how
feedback will be provided.
• Step Two – A subject expert will mark your work using the criteria provided in the assessment
brief.
• Step Three – A moderation meeting takes place where all members of the teaching and marking
team will review the marking of others to confirm whether they agree with the mark and feedback
• Step Four – Work at Levels 5 and 6 then goes to an external examiner who will review a sample
of work to confirm that the marking between different staff is consistent and fair
• Stop Five – Your mark and feedback is processed by the Office and made available to you.
-----
Resit Assignment Details

Resit submission date: please see Moodle

For students who are offered a resit you are required to improve and resubmit your original work as
well as adding a further reflective commentary of up to 500 words discussing what you have learned
from the process [additional page included in your PowerPoint presentation]. You must resubmit your
work using the specific resit Moodle Assignment link on Moodle.

You should:
1. Review your previously submitted work and read carefully the feedback given by the marker.

2. Use this feedback to help you revisit and rewrite your work, improving it in the areas identified as
weak in the original marking process

3. Include with your resubmission an additional reflective piece (up to 500 words) on what you
understand was weak, how you set about addressing this and what you have learned from this that
may help you with further assignments. You should address the following specifically:

i) Identify tutor feedback points on your original work and identify where/how the resit work has
changed (give page number) in response to feedback

ii) Identify the lessons you have learnt from doing the resit

iii) Reflect on how your feedback and this process will help you improve future assignments

If you did not submit work at the first opportunity you cannot reflect on your feedback. However, you
are still required to submit a reflective piece in which you identify your reasons for non-submission, the
implications of non-submission for your future success and how you propose to address this in the
future.

If you were deferred at the first assessment opportunity you do not need to include the reflective piece
as this is classed a first submission, not a resit.

The original marking criteria will still apply (see marking grid provided above) except that 1/3rd of the
30% weighting for presentation will be awarded instead to your reflective piece.

---
Grading Criteria
Rubric category
(range)
Fail with
Assigned mark >>
Outstanding Excellent Very Good Good Adequate Marginal Fail Fail with major Not done
________________
(80-89) (70-79) (60-69) (50-59) (40-49) omissions omissions
Marking criteria
(30-39) (20-29)
(weight out of 100)
100 85 75 65 55 45 35 25 0
Missing. Wholly
Outstanding Exceptional Very good Good Satisfactory Limited Very limited Irrelevant/
Knowledge incorrect or not
evidence of evidence of demonstration of demonstration of demonstration of demonstration of demonstration of incomprehensible
attempted.
(20%) appropriate appropriate understanding understanding of understanding of understanding of understanding of content.
understanding understanding and research professional professional professional professional
Understanding of the No evidence of
consulting brief and and research and research giving a view on services services services services
understanding or
process – contextualisation giving an giving an the positioning of landscape, landscape, landscape, landscape,
of case scenario. research.
insightful and insightful and the proposal placing the placing the inconclusive somewhat
well-balanced well-balanced within the context proposal proposal placement of the inappropriate
overview and overview and of the business accordingly in the somewhat in the proposal within placement of the
clear positioning clear positioning partnering / wider offering and wider offering and the context of the proposal within
of proposal within of proposal within professional within the context within the context case scenario. the context of the
the context of the the context of the services of the case of the case case scenario.
business business landscape. scenario. scenario.
partnering / partnering /
professional professional
services services
landscape. landscape.

Missing. Wholly
Outstanding Exceptional Very good Good proposal Satisfactory Marginal proposal Limited proposal Irrelevant/
Critical Analysis incorrect or not
proposal proposal proposal examining the proposal attempting to based on a very incomprehensible
attempted.
(25%) examining the examining the examining the business problem examining the analysing the limited analysis of content.
business business problem business problem in a perceptive business business problem, the business
No evidence of
Diagnosis of business problem in a in a clear and in a clear and way, including problem, some limited critical problem, little to
understanding
problem and client needs. clear, perceptive perceptive way, perceptive way, critical critical appreciation of the no critical
and/or critical
and imaginative including critical including critical appreciation of appreciation of challenges from appreciation of the
analysis.
way including appreciation of appreciation of some challenges the challenges the perspective of challenges from
critical conflicting points conflicting points from the from the the client the perspective of

9
 Rubric category
(range)
Fail with
Assigned mark >>
Outstanding Excellent Very Good Good Adequate Marginal Fail Fail with major Not done
________________
(80-89) (70-79) (60-69) (50-59) (40-49) omissions omissions
Marking criteria
(30-39) (20-29)
(weight out of 100)
100 85 75 65 55 45 35 25 0
appreciation of of view and how of view from the perspective of the perspective of the stakeholder the client
conflicting points they relate to perspective of the client stakeholder client stakeholder and/or respective stakeholder
of view and how each other and client stakeholder and respective and/or respective business domain. and/or respective
they relate to from the and respective business domain. business domain. business domain.
each other and perspective of the business domain.
from the client stakeholder
perspective of and respective
the client business domain.
stakeholder and
respective
business domain.

Missing. Wholly
Outstanding Exceptional Very well thought Well thought Satisfactory Marginal proposal Limited or Irrelevant/
Proposal incorrect or not
complete and complete and through and through and proposal addressing most incomplete incomprehensible
attempted.
(30%) comprehensive comprehensive complete complete addressing most crucial elements, proposal including content.
proposal proposal proposal proposal required making use of some elements,
Application of consulting No evidence of
tools and knowledge as addressing all addressing all addressing all addressing all or elements, making very basic tools making use of few
understanding
part of the pitch. required required required most required use of basic tools and problem- very basic tools
and/or critical
elements, elements, making elements, making elements, making and problem- solving methods, and problem-
analysis.
making use of use of tools and use of tools and use of tools and solving methods, identification of solving methods,
tools and problem-solving problem-solving problem-solving identification of some risks and limited
problem-solving methods methods methods relying some risks and assumptions. identification of
methods underpinned by underpinned by a on a considered assumptions. risks and
underpinned by superbly strong list of list of risk and assumptions.
superbly considered list of assumptions and assumptions.
considered list of assumptions and risks.
assumptions and risks.
risks.

10
 Rubric category
(range)
Fail with
Assigned mark >>
Outstanding Excellent Very Good Good Adequate Marginal Fail Fail with major Not done
________________
(80-89) (70-79) (60-69) (50-59) (40-49) omissions omissions
Marking criteria
(30-39) (20-29)
(weight out of 100)
100 85 75 65 55 45 35 25 0

Presentation An outstanding An exceptional A very good A good and A satisfactory Presentation, Presentation, An obviously Missing. Wholly
incorrect or not
professional professional professional complete set of speaker notes speaker notes inadequate
(30%) attempted.
presentation, presentation, presentation, presentation, presentation, and recording and recording presentation
Quality of writing, document
presentation and recording, speaker notes speaker notes speaker notes speaker notes speaker notes are somewhat are not always speaking notes
use of clear messages,
correct format/style, and recording and recording and recording and recording and recording conclusive and conclusive, and recording
structure, correct syntax of
references. Correct with clear and with clear and with strong with clear follow a narrative is not without
referencing.
concise concise messaging appropriate messaging but somewhat of a aligned and/or contents and/or
messaging messaging somewhat messaging and limited narrative, tailored to client seriously
excellently tailored to tailored to some tailoring tailoring to limited tailoring needs. Format lacking clarity.
tailored to client needs client needs to client needs client needs to client needs does not always No attempt of
client needs following and following following and/or and/or follow board Harvard
following board paper board paper board paper following following board paper format referencing.
board paper format. Quality format. format. Good board paper paper format. and Harvard The material is
format. High sources, Relevant quality sources format. Some relevant referencing. unacceptable as
quality impactful sources, clear and consistent Relevant sources and/or a a business
sources, illustrations illustrations; Harvard sources and for good attempt of pitch.
impactful and consistent consistent referencing. the most part Harvard
illustrations Harvard Harvard consistent referencing.
and consistent referencing, referencing, Harvard
Harvard referencing.
referencing.

11