LC-PO-05 — Economic Rationale for Local Content

A one-page reference for Unit 1: the central economic question, the four routine choices that decide where value goes, the five functions that move local value, and the difference between an action that is compliant and one that creates value.

Five questions on Unit 1, graded by the platform. 20 marks each, 80 out of 100 to pass, three attempts.

Unit 1 asks you to move from “Local Content is required” to “Local Content creates value”. This task makes you commit that in writing, in your own words, about your own work.

What to submit

One page, uploaded as PDF or Word. Answer all three points.

1. In one sentence, explain why Local Content matters economically in your sector. Avoid compliance language — aim for the value logic.
2. Name one decision in your own function that can influence local value retention, and explain how it does so. Be specific: a decision you or your team actually make.
3. Give one example from your organisation of an action that was compliant, actioned and evidenced but changed nothing — and say what would have made it create value.

How it is marked (100)

• 40 — economic value logic rather than compliance language
• 30 — specificity: a real decision, a real example
• 30 — the compliance-versus-consequence distinction is understood

Pass mark 60. You have three attempts and seven days from enrolment.

A one-page reference for Unit 2: what local spend can and cannot tell you, the spend-flow map, the five leakage signals, and the five-lens decision screen.

Five questions on Unit 2, graded by the platform. 20 marks each, 80 out of 100 to pass, three attempts.

This is Worksheet 1 from Unit 2, submitted for marking. Use a contract, spend category or supplier decision you actually know — not a hypothetical one.

What to submit

One or two pages, uploaded as PDF or Word, answering all five headings.

1. What is the spend category or contract?
2. Which parts of the value are currently retained in Oman?
3. Where might value leak outside Oman? Use the five leakage signals as prompts.
4. Which retention levers are realistic? Realistic — not aspirational.
5. What evidence would show stronger local value?

How it is marked (100)

• 20 — a real, specific decision rather than a generic example
• 25 — retained value and leakage are separated with reasons, not asserted
• 30 — the levers proposed are realistic and within someone’s control
• 25 — the evidence named could actually be verified by someone else

Pass mark 70. You have three attempts and ten days from enrolment. Keep your submission: you will need it for the capstone and for LC-PF-03.

A one-page reference for Unit 3: the four value channels, the supplier development ladder, matching SME scope to readiness, and the activity / output / outcome distinction that reporting rests on.

Five questions on Unit 3, graded by the platform. 20 marks each, 80 out of 100 to pass, three attempts.

This is Worksheet 2 from Unit 3, submitted for marking. Take one Local Content activity you know — a supplier awareness session, Omani technician training, a local sourcing initiative, SME onboarding support, or a local stockholding plan — and carry it all the way through.

What to submit

One page, uploaded as PDF or Word, with all four links in the chain.

1. The activity — what was or will be done?
2. The immediate output — what does it directly produce? Usually a count of something.
3. The value outcome — what is meaningfully different afterwards? Name who benefited and what they can now do.
4. The evidence — how would someone else verify it? Data, documents, delivery records, performance results.

How it is marked (100)

• 20 — activity and output are correctly separated
• 40 — the outcome is a real change, not a restated output
• 40 — the evidence could be checked by someone who was not there

Pass mark 70. Three attempts, ten days from enrolment.

A one-page reference for Unit 4: how project demand can mature into sector capacity, resilience as a value outcome, where to look across the value chain, and the six-question diversification and resilience test.

Five questions on Unit 4, graded by the platform. 20 marks each, 80 out of 100 to pass, three attempts.

Think about one area of your own operation and take the long view on it. This is the capability reflection from Unit 4, submitted for marking.

What to submit

One page, uploaded as PDF or Word, answering all five points.

1. What local capability already exists today?
2. What capability gap prevents more local value?
3. What could realistically improve in 12–24 months? Realistic — the word is doing real work here.
4. Who would need to act — buyer, supplier, HR, contract holder, regulator?
5. What evidence would show progress?

How it is marked (100)

• 25 — today’s capability is described accurately, not aspirationally
• 25 — the gap is named specifically
• 25 — the 12–24 month improvement is realistic and passes the diversification and resilience test
• 25 — the actors and the evidence are both named

Pass mark 70. Three attempts, ten days from enrolment.

A one-page reference for Unit 5: the integrated two-bid case, the five questions to work through before choosing, the shape of a value decision memo, and the five practitioner messages to carry into LC-PF-03.

Five questions on the integrated case and on preparing for LC-PF-03. 20 marks each, 80 out of 100 to pass, three attempts.

This is Worksheet 3 from Unit 5, submitted for marking. Write your recommendation on the two-bid maintenance case in the format the workshop will use. Do not choose on price alone, and be ready to defend the reasoning.

What to submit

One page, uploaded as PDF or Word, with all six lines.

1. Recommended option — Bid A or Bid B.
2. Main economic value reason.
3. Key risk or trade-off — name it plainly. A recommendation that hides its trade-off is weaker, not stronger.
4. Evidence required before award.
5. Monitoring action during delivery.
6. How this builds local capability.

How it is marked (100)

• 20 — an option is named and owned
• 30 — the economic value reason is a value argument, not a preference
• 25 — the trade-off is stated rather than avoided
• 25 — the evidence and the monitoring action are both checkable

Pass mark 70. Three attempts, ten days from enrolment. Either bid can earn full marks — the reasoning is what is being assessed.

Read this before you start: what is graded automatically, what an instructor grades, the pass mark and attempts, and what the certificate depends on.

Ten questions across all five units. 10 marks each, 80 out of 100 to pass, two attempts, 30 minutes, presented in random order. Nine are graded automatically; the written question is graded by an instructor.

The capstone brings the five applied tasks together into the single submission you will take into the face-to-face course, LC-PF-03. Work from one real example throughout — the same contract, spend category or supplier decision.

What to submit

Three to five pages, uploaded as PDF or Word, in five parts.

1. The example — the contract, spend category, supplier decision or workforce-development example you are working from, and why you chose it.
2. Where value is retained — local suppliers, Omani jobs, local services, local production.
3. Where value may leak — imported, offshore, pass-through or unsupported capability areas, tested against the five leakage signals.
4. One improvement idea — one realistic way to improve local value retention, carried through as a complete outcome chain: activity, output, value outcome, evidence.
5. One question for the workshop — the thing you most want to resolve with the group.

How it is marked (100)

• 20 — one real example, carried consistently through all five parts
• 20 — retention and leakage identified with reasons, using the diagnostic signals rather than impressions
• 30 — the improvement is realistic, and the outcome chain reaches a genuine value outcome rather than stopping at an output
• 20 — the evidence named could be verified by someone who was not there
• 10 — a specific, answerable question for the workshop

Pass mark 70. Two attempts, fourteen days from enrolment. Bring your marked submission to LC-PF-03.