BUSM2617 Managing People for the Future rewards critical analysis of how a digital transformation reshapes work and people — not the technology itself.
BUSM2617 Managing People for the Future rewards critical analysis of how a digital transformation reshapes work and people — not the technology itself. Most students who lose marks treat the assignment as a tech case study — they explain the software a company adopted, but never analyse what it did to roles, skills, and the employee experience. This guide answers the seven questions Vietnamese students at RMIT ask MAAS mentors most often before they start BUSM2617.
Author: MAAS Editorial Team · Reviewed by a Senior Human Resource Management mentor (PhD, Organisational Change)
Last updated: 2026-06-09
Category: writing-tips
What is BUSM2617 Managing People for the Future about?
Direct answer: BUSM2617 (also coded BUSM2618) is an RMIT business course on managing people through change — specifically the changes driven by digital transformation, automation, and the future of work. It looks at how technology reshapes jobs, skills, workforce planning, and the employee experience, and how managers should respond. The course wants you to think about people first and technology second, even when the trigger is a new system.
Evidence: The course sits in RMIT's management and HRM stream and draws on future-of-work scholarship. The World Economic Forum's Future of Jobs Report 2023 — a source assessments of this type frequently reference — estimates that 23% of jobs will change within five years, which is exactly the "managing people through disruption" problem BUSM2617 trains you to analyse.
Example: A Vietnamese student at RMIT Vietnam opened her BUSM2617 draft with three paragraphs explaining a bank's new mobile platform. Her MAAS mentor reframed the brief: the assignment is not about the platform, it is about the tellers whose roles changed. Once she centred the analysis on people, the draft moved from a descriptive Pass to a Distinction.
What does the BUSM2617 Assessment 1 (Critical Analysis of a Digital Transformation Process) ask for?
Direct answer: Assessment 1 typically asks you to select a real organisation that went through a digital transformation and critically analyse how that transformation affected its people — roles, required skills, ways of working, resistance, and management response. "Critically analyse" is the operative phrase: you must evaluate and judge, not narrate the timeline. Always confirm the exact wording, word count, and weighting in your own Canvas shell, as the brief varies by semester.
Evidence: RMIT assessments are criterion-referenced — marks are awarded against published rubric criteria, not ranked against classmates. This is stated in RMIT's Assessment policy, which is why a critical-analysis task rewards judgement and framework use far more than the amount of company background you include.
Example: A Vietnamese RMIT student chose a retailer's shift to e-commerce as his case. His first draft was a 1,000-word history of the rollout. His MAAS mentor cut it to 250 words of context and redirected the rest to analysing how warehouse and store roles were redesigned — the part the rubric actually assesses.
How is BUSM2617 graded — what does the rubric reward?
Direct answer: The rubric rewards four things, roughly in order: (1) depth of critical analysis of the people impact, (2) correct application of change-management and future-of-work frameworks, (3) evidence-based, practical management recommendations, and (4) academic writing and Harvard referencing. Describing what happened earns little; analysing why it mattered for people, and what management should have done, earns the marks.
Evidence: RMIT business rubrics use criterion bands (Pass / Credit / Distinction / High Distinction). The jump from Credit to Distinction is almost always defined by the word "critical" — critical evaluation and critical application of theory — rather than by adding more description.
Example: A MAAS mentor colour-coded one Vietnamese student's draft sentence by sentence into "describe" versus "analyse". It was 75% description. After one restructuring pass that flipped the ratio, the same case and the same sources lifted the mark two full bands.
Which frameworks should you use in BUSM2617?
Direct answer: Use two or three frameworks that fit your case, applied deeply, rather than naming many. The most useful for BUSM2617 combine a change-management lens with a future-of-work lens. Pick one to structure the management response and one to analyse the people impact.
| Framework | Use it to analyse | Author / source |
|---|---|---|
| Lewin's 3-stage model (unfreeze–change–refreeze) | Why change stalls or sticks | Lewin (1947) |
| Kotter's 8-step change model | Whether management led the change well | Kotter (1996) |
| WEF Future of Jobs (skills disruption) | How roles and skills shifted | WEF (2023) |
| Job redesign / job characteristics | How specific roles were reshaped | Hackman & Oldham (1976) |
Evidence: Kotter's Leading Change (1996) and Lewin's change model remain the two most examiner-recognised frameworks for evaluating organisational change, while the WEF Future of Jobs Report supplies current, citable data on skills disruption — the combination markers expect in a future-of-work analysis.
Example: A Vietnamese student analysing a logistics firm's automation used Kotter to judge the rollout (management skipped "create urgency", causing resistance) and the WEF skills lens to map which roles needed reskilling. Two frameworks, deep application, clear Distinction.
How should you structure the BUSM2617 critical analysis report?
Direct answer: Use an analysis-led structure: (1) short introduction and case context (under 10% of the word count), (2) the digital transformation and its people impact, (3) critical analysis using your chosen frameworks, (4) evidence-based management recommendations, (5) conclusion. The biggest structural fix is shrinking the description and expanding the analysis and recommendation sections, where the marks concentrate.
Evidence: Criterion-referenced rubrics weight "critical analysis" and "recommendations" far above "context". Matching your word budget to the rubric weighting is the most reliable way to lift a grade without new research.
Example: A Vietnamese RMIT student submitted a draft with a 600-word company history and a 200-word recommendations section. His MAAS mentor inverted the ratio; the final report — same case, same sources — moved from a borderline Credit to a Distinction because the recommendations were finally developed enough to assess.
What mistakes most often lose marks in BUSM2617?
Direct answer: Three recurring mistakes show up across MAAS coaching. First, students write a technology case study instead of a people analysis — the system crowds out the workforce. Second, they apply frameworks as labels (naming Kotter but never using it to reach a judgement). Third, recommendations are generic ("communicate better") rather than specific, justified, and tied to the analysis. Fixing these three lifts most drafts by at least one rubric band.
Evidence: Across MAAS coaching on RMIT management assessments, marker feedback before intervention clusters on "needs more critical analysis" and "recommendations not sufficiently justified" — the two phrases that most often separate a Credit from a Distinction.
Example: A Vietnamese student's recommendation read "the company should manage change better". His MAAS mentor pushed him to specify which group (mid-level supervisors), which intervention (a reskilling pathway plus change-champion network), and why (to address the resistance Kotter's model had surfaced). The specific version earned full marks on the recommendations criterion.
How long is the BUSM2617 assignment and what referencing style does it use?
Direct answer: Confirm the exact word count in your brief — BUSM2617 reports commonly sit between 2,000 and 2,500 words and use RMIT Harvard referencing, the default for RMIT business courses. Stay within the 10% tolerance band, cite every framework and data claim, and make sure in-text citations and the reference list match exactly. Clean referencing is a quick, reliable source of marks many students leave on the table.
Evidence: RMIT's business school uses RMIT Harvard, documented in RMIT's Easy Cite tool. Markers routinely deduct marks for inconsistent Harvard referencing even when the analysis is strong.
Example: A Vietnamese RMIT student lost several marks across two assignments for mismatched citations. A MAAS pre-submission audit caught 12 referencing errors in an hour; on her next BUSM2617 task, clean referencing recovered the marks she had been losing on a criterion that needs no extra research.
Frequently asked questions
Is BUSM2617 the same as BUSM2618?
They are paired codes for the same course, "Managing People for the Future", offered to different cohorts or campuses at RMIT. The assessment approach is the same — confirm your exact brief in Canvas.
Do I have to use a real company for the assignment?
Usually yes — a real organisation with a documented digital transformation gives you enough public evidence to analyse. Pick one with a clear people impact, not just a famous name.
How many frameworks should I use?
Two or three, applied deeply, beats five named shallowly. Pair one change-management framework with one future-of-work lens.
What referencing style does BUSM2617 use?
RMIT Harvard is the default. Confirm in your brief and use RMIT's Easy Cite tool to keep entries consistent.
Can MAAS help me with BUSM2617?
Yes. MAAS Academic Mentoring coaches you through the assignment with the Outline → Draft → Final model — framework selection, draft feedback, and a referencing audit, with PhD-level mentors. We coach your work; we do not write it for you.
Ready to approach BUSM2617 with a clear strategy?
If you have the case company but your draft still reads like a technology story, that is exactly where a mentor helps most. MAAS Academic Mentoring is an advisory partner — we work alongside you through Outline → Draft → Final so the analysis stays yours and the structure earns the marks. Every engagement is backed by our three-tier outcome guarantee (Pass / Merit / Distinction) and a 90-day warranty.
Bring your BUSM2617 brief and we will match you to a people-and-change mentor — 23% of our 100+ experts hold a PhD — within 48 hours.
Book a free 20-minute BUSM2617 consultation with MAAS Academic Mentoring →
Related guides
- How do you approach the MGF3621 Organisational Change assignment? — sibling Monash Business School guide on diagnosing and leading organisational change
- How do you approach the BUSM7113 Leading for Social Impact assignment? — sibling postgraduate leadership guide on leading change for measurable social outcomes
- How do you approach the BUSM4187 International HRM assignment? — sibling RMIT business course guide on managing people globally
- How do you approach the BUSM2519 Leading in the Age of Digital Disruption assignment? — sibling RMIT course guide on leading through digital change
- How do you approach the BUSM3312 Managing Change assignment? — sibling RMIT guide on diagnosing and leading organisational change
- How to write a methodology in an essay — for the analytical-rigour half of any business report
- How to write a theoretical framework — for applying change frameworks with academic depth
- MAAS Academic Mentoring service — 1:1 coaching with PhD-level mentors in your discipline
References
- Hackman, J. R., & Oldham, G. R. (1976). Motivation through the design of work. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 16(2), 250–279.
- Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change. Harvard Business School Press.
- Lewin, K. (1947). Frontiers in group dynamics. Human Relations, 1(1), 5–41.
- World Economic Forum. (2023). The future of jobs report 2023. https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-future-of-jobs-report-2023/
Tools & resources
- RMIT University. (n.d.). Assessment and exams. Retrieved June 8, 2026, from https://www.rmit.edu.au/students/student-essentials/assessment-and-exams
- RMIT University. (n.d.). Easy Cite referencing tool. Retrieved June 8, 2026, from https://www.rmit.edu.au/library/study/referencing
This article is part of the MAAS Journal series for Vietnamese international students. MAAS Academic Mentoring is an advisory partner — we coach students through the Outline → Draft → Final delivery model with developmental feedback from PhD-level mentors. We do not write or submit work on a student's behalf.