CQUniversity Unit Profile.

Develop a conceptual model that represents the relationship between people, the organisation, technology and systems that can be used to develop an anticipatory sociotechnical systems approach to managing safety in the organisation.
This conceptual model should be in the form of a graphical representation. 
Provide a detailed explanation that justifies the proposed model. This should be supported by recent, reputable literature relating to the organisational context, OHS management systems, a socio-technical system approach and an overall socio-political context of work.

A detailed rubric and detailing of available marks will be provided in Moodle at the commencement of term. 

Level of GenAI use allowed:
Level 2: You may use Al for planning, idea development, and research. Your final submission should show how you have developed and refined these ideas.

 
The full AI Assessment Scale table is available in the Assessment block on the Moodle site.

Relevance (25%)
Depth of understanding in formulating a conceptual model.
A cogent conceptual model is presented.
The model design demonstrates relationships between people, the organisation, technology and systems.
The model provides an anticipatory sociotechnical systems framework that can be used to understand work systems and what can contribute to system success.

Validity (25%)
Connections are made between the model presented, supporting evidence and discussion.
Depth and extent of discussion, ie: understanding of concepts is evident. 
Accuracy and originality of the discussion.
Judgement and reasoning is applied in the discussion; ie: assertions made are based on level of critical thought, analysis and synthesis of current literature.

Depth and extent of evidence used in the discussion (25%)
Quality of evidence sourced in support of the model and discussion.
Ability to critically analyse literature and apply to real-world contexts.
Linkages to systems used within the organisation are evident.

Presentation (25%)
Structure and flow of information is clear and methodical.
Coherence and clarity of expression (spelling, grammar, syntax).
Style and formatting in accordance with required academic standards.
Typographical precision is evident. 

This assessment has 2 parts.

Part A. Critical review 

Select one accident causation model from each of the categories below:

• Simple linear model
• Systemic linear model
• Complex non-linear model

 Explore literature and critically review the theoretical underpinnings of the chosen models in relation to their effectiveness in:

• Addressing failure,
• Establishing and validating corrective, remedial and preventative actions, and
• Learning from Failure in general.

Part A should be limited to 2000 words maximum and be supported by relevant citations (Minimum of 8) from the literature.   

 Part B. Position paper. 

In this assessment task you will choose a case study of an accident that has occurred in the 21st century. Ensure that the case study you chose has adequate published material to enable you to complete the task.

Select two of the 3 models used in Part A.

Populate the models with the critical factors from your chosen case study to explain, in the language of the models, the failures which occurred in the accident. 

Prepare a written report to contrast and explain how well the two theoretical models enabled explanation of the accident phenomena in the case study. 

Part B should not exceed 2000 words. It should be supported by relevant citations (minimum of 8) from the literature.

Both papers are to be written in the third person.

Level of GenAI use allowed:
Level 2: You may use Al for planning, idea development, and research. Your final submission should show how you have developed and refined these ideas.

The full AI Assessment Scale table is available in the Assessment block on the Moodle site.

1. Critically reviews the theoretical underpinnings of 3 accident causation models. (20%)
2. Reviews the models in relation to their effectiveness in addressing the failure, establishing and validating corrective, remedial and preventative actions and learning from the failure. (20%)
3. Populates the selected accident causation models and provides a clear depiction of the chosen accident. (20%)
4. Compares and contrasts the selected models on their effectiveness in explaining the accident phenomena in the selected case study. (20%)
5. Submissions are professionally presented and (5%)
6. Grammar and spelling are consistently accurate (5%)
7. References including the provision of a reference list and intext referencing in Harvard style for all information, data, table, images sourced for this assignment. (10%)

For this task, assume you work within the health and safety team for a large and complex organisation. Senior management is aware of two theories that explain system safety in complex systems and have tasked you to write a report on the two theories: High Reliability Theory and Organisational Resilience, how they differ, and how effective might they be into the future? 

To complete this task, you will need to review the literature on both theories, and then critically compare the two theories. Based on this comparative exercise, you are to consider which theoretical approach is more effective at addressing system failure into the future. For this you will need to critically reflect on both theories and present an argument for why one theoretical approach will likely be more effective in the future than the other by presenting reasons that informed your judgement.

To be effective, you will need to identify and consider future needs of the organisation and how the theoretical model might address system failure. This could include technology advancement, workforce changes, business strategy, climate change etc.

Word count - Maximum 3000 words

Level of GenAI use allowed:
Level 2: You may use Al for planning, idea development, and research. Your final submission should show how you have developed and refined these ideas.

 
The full AI Assessment Scale table is available in the Assessment block on the Moodle site.

This assessment item is graded according to the following assessment criteria:

Literature review (40 marks)

• Demonstrates a comprehensive understanding of both theories under examination (10 marks)
• Key concepts, principles and historical developing are clearly explained (10 marks)
• The literature review is substantial and covers seminal and recent research on both theories. (10 marks)
• A broad range of highly reputable academic sources are utilised to form judgement (i.e. peer reviewed) support the analysis (a minimum of 10 sources). (10 marks)

Analysis (20 marks)

• Critically evaluates the merits of theory in addressing identified future challenges. (10 marks)
• Identifies future trends and the challenges they create to system safety in complex organisations. (10 marks)

Discussion (20 marks)

• Demonstrates insight of the theoretical and practical implications for safety in complex systems. (10 marks)
• Presents a well-reasoned argument for which theory is likely to be more effective in the future. (10 marks) 

Recommendations (10 marks)

• Recommendations are logical and link to the future challenges previously identified. (5 marks)
• Recommendations are prioritised and supported to enhance their adoption. (5 marks)

Technicalities (10 marks)

• The report is well-structured, concise, and appropriately formatted.
• Adheres to academic writing standards (CQUniversity Harvard Style in referencing style)