Hi Mike,
I have used AI to assess the assignment against the provided rubric, which
highlighted several areas for improvement. In addition to these suggestions,
I’ve uploaded the current draft, the assignment guidelines, and a sample
assignment to guide the writing style and structure.
Please note the approved topic: The Impact of Cloud-Based ERP Systems
on Operational Efficiency in Maritime and Port Operations: Opportunities and
Challenges.
Although I previously shared this topic after receiving instructor approval,
it seems the revisions did not fully incorporate it.
I’m not certain how much the new topic may alter the existing content, but I
would like the assignment revised per the feedback. Please avoid using AI
software for rewriting. The work currently lacks a human touch and doesn’t
fully reflect master ’s-level writing. Ensure the final draft stays within the 12–15-page
limit (approximately 3,750-4,500 words).
Thank you!
Additionally instructions below:
Based on the guidelines, requirements, and rubric provided for your
MGMT6000 literature review assignment on cloud-based ERP systems, I’ll assess
the draft against each rubric criterion and provide feedback for improvement:
1. Introduction (10 marks)
Score: 8/10
- Strengths: The introduction clearly states
the topic and inquiry questions, with relevant background context on
cloud-based ERP systems in the maritime and port sector. - Suggestions for Improvement: To refine, consider explicitly
mentioning the objectives of the literature review as required by the
assignment. Also, clarify the structure of the literature review and
briefly mention the themes to give readers an overview.
2. Reliability & Quality of
Sources (15 marks)
Score: 12/15
- Strengths: The sources selected are recent,
relevant, and support the topic of cloud-based ERP systems in maritime and
port operations. - Suggestions for Improvement: While the sources are generally
good, incorporating additional empirical studies that directly examine
cloud ERP implementations could provide more depth. Aim to explicitly
connect the sources to the research questions or objectives set out in the
introduction.
3. Content: Analysis (30 marks)
Score: 25/30
- Strengths: The analysis effectively
addresses different themes, such as automation, data access, and supply
chain efficiency, demonstrating a solid understanding of the literature. - Suggestions for Improvement: Increase critical comparisons
across sources, especially where there are contrasting findings. Adding
examples from real-world applications (like Maersk or Nordic Tankers) and
relating them to literature findings is excellent; however, strive to
synthesize across studies to show where authors agree or disagree.
4. Clarity & Organization (15
marks)
Score: 13/15
- Strengths: The structure is logical, with
themes organized in a way that supports the narrative flow of the paper. - Suggestions for Improvement: Further refine transitions
between themes to improve readability. Ensure each theme logically leads
into the next, making the progression of ideas clear.
5. Format and References (10 marks)
Score: 9/10
- Strengths: The formatting aligns well with
APA 7th edition guidelines, and references are mostly correctly formatted. - Suggestions for Improvement: Double-check in-text citations
for consistency with APA style. Minor adjustments may be needed in the
reference list, such as italics for book titles.
6. Grammar & Sentence Structure (5
marks)
Score: 4/5
- Strengths: Generally well-written with a
formal academic tone. - Suggestions for Improvement: Minor grammar adjustments could
improve readability. Ensure all sentences are complete and avoid overly
complex phrasing for clarity.
7. Conclusion (15 marks)
Score: 12/15
- Strengths: The conclusion synthesizes the
main findings and addresses future research needs well. - Suggestions for Improvement: Briefly mention if there were
any gaps in the literature based on the inquiry questions from the
introduction. Discuss any practical implications or recommendations based
on the review findings, as well as specific gaps that future research
should address.
Overall Score: 83/100
In summary, the draft demonstrates a solid foundation and a comprehensive
approach to the literature review topic. Addressing these improvement areas can
strengthen the review further and align closely with the assignment guidelines.
Upon assessing the draft based on the assignment outline and specific
guidelines, I’ve identified the following key areas for improvement to fully
align with expectations:
1. Title and Abstract
- Current State: The title is clear and
topic-specific. The abstract provides a succinct overview but focuses more
on findings than methodology or objective. - Suggested Improvements: Ensure the abstract includes the
research objective, methodology (briefly mention it’s a systematic
review), and main conclusions. This alignment with the guidelines will
better introduce the reader to the focus and purpose of the review.
2. Introduction
- Current State: The introduction is
comprehensive, stating the topic and inquiry questions with relevant
background information. - Suggested Improvements: Make explicit mention of the objectives
of the literature review, as this is specifically requested. Outline the themes
or structure in the final sentences to orient the reader. A revised
introduction might look like: - “This literature review examines
[narrowed focus] by analyzing recent studies under themes such as [list
themes briefly]. This structure allows an organized examination of
[purpose or relevance of each theme].”
3. Body/Discussion (Themes)
- Current State: The paper addresses various
relevant themes, such as digital transformation, automation, real-time
data access, and supply chain management. Each theme provides a summary of
the literature and some synthesis. - Suggested Improvements: To fully meet the guideline
requirements for critical analysis and synthesis, add: - Comparison and Contrast: Show where authors agree and
differ more explicitly. For example, in themes like cost reduction or
scalability, indicate which sources present differing views or emphasize
unique challenges. - Integrative Synthesis: Conclude each theme with a
brief synthesis of how the reviewed literature collectively addresses or
leaves gaps in the inquiry question(s). This can clarify the significance
of each theme to the overall topic.
4. Recommendations Section
- Current State: The recommendations are
practical and grounded in the literature. - Suggested Improvements: Tie the recommendations back to
the review findings more explicitly. For example, if resistance to change
was noted as a barrier in the literature, link it directly to your
recommendation for change management and training as a practical
solution. This will enhance the review’s alignment with the assignment’s
requirements for drawing actionable conclusions based on the literature.
5. Conclusion
- Current State: The conclusion summarizes the
main findings and suggests future research directions. - Suggested Improvements: For full alignment with the
guidelines: - Summarize the findings per
inquiry question from the introduction to ensure a cohesive closing. - Address any specific gaps
the literature leaves unfilled, such as limited research on long-term
impacts of cloud ERP on smaller port operations, if applicable. - Briefly reinforce why the
narrowed topic (cloud ERP in maritime operations) is critical for future
research or industry application, providing a practical closing
statement.
6. References and Formatting
- Current State: APA formatting is well adhered
to in both in-text citations and the reference list. - Suggested Improvements: Minor adjustments may be needed
for consistency (e.g., ensuring correct italicization and punctuation for
APA 7th edition).
7. Additional Alignment Points:
- Article Selection and Relevance: Ensure all selected articles
explicitly align with each theme to demonstrate a thorough and selective
approach, as required. If some articles are tangential, consider replacing
them with more targeted sources that strengthen the analysis. - Grammar and Syntax: The draft is well-written, but
refining sentences for clarity and conciseness in dense sections can
improve readability and professionalism.
Addressing these areas should bring the draft into full alignment with
both the outline and assignment requirements, reinforcing its quality,
coherence, and relevance.