| Assessment Criteria |
| Learning Outcomes: Knowledge and Understanding tested in this assignment: |
| The assignment may demonstrate learning of the following outcomes:
1. Analyze the changing nature of the global trading environment and the major strategic and contextual trends which affect global strategic decision-making; 2. Research and evaluate the different social and cultural conventions which effect buying behaviour and marketing approaches; 3. Examine the ethical considerations and implications of a range of global marketing strategies; 4. Evaluate the methodologies for global marketing research and a range of sources of data/information and tools of analysis necessary to support a global marketing strategy.
|
| Learning Outcomes: Skills and Attributes tested in this assignment: |
| The assignment will require students to:
5. Critically analyze the global marketing environment through the use of models and tools for decision making; 7. Carry out research on a business and a global market.
|
| Feedback /Marking criteria for this Assignment |
| Performance will be assessed using HBS Grading Criteria and Mark scheme. Guidance for improvement will be given in writing on the on the StudyNet Feedback Form within 4 weeks of submission.Late assignments up to one week late will be reduced by 10 grade points per day will receive a maximum numeric grade of: Levels 4, 5 and 6 (UG) – 40 Level 7 (PG) – 50 Plagiarism offences will receive standard penalties. |
| Detailed Brief for Individual/Group Assessment | ||||||||||||||
| Assignment Title: Going Global Checklist
Description of the assignment:
You are required to select a Small to Medium Sized Enterprise (SME) and produce a Report which identifies a prioritised list of issues that your company should consider when going international or global with their product(s) or Service(s). The issues identified should be relevant to your selected organization and their inclusion justified. Ensure that the issues identified are supported by academic theory. Any specific instructions: This is a REPORT, not an essay structure so present it accordingly. The only modification to a normal report will be the inclusion of academic references, which must be included. As a guide to content you are advised to look at the lecture programme of topics. Most are highly relevant to this assignment brief. You must justify the issues identified in your list, and their position in your list, most important first and least important last. Why are the issues identified important? You should consider at least 8 issues, more may be possible, but you will be limited by the word count of 2200 words Maximum. You are recommended to be more concerned with the depth of your analysis rather than the number of issues.
Mark scheme:
See adapted Generic assessment criteria below.
We will discuss the assignment in a lecture. You are advised to raise any issues you may have with your seminar tutor or myself in Office hours. |
| Penalty: Moderator:
Total Mark Awarded: |
UG Grading Criteria for HBS Individual Report Module Code: 6BUS1025 Lecturer: AG Student ID number:_________________________
| REPORT | Presentation & structure 15 |
Intellectual Curiosity 15 |
Content/ Terms/ Findings/ Definitions/ Calculations 20 |
Application & Integration 20 |
Discussion /Analysis /Critical evaluation 30 |
| Task details
lecturer to amend to suit |
Follows report structure & keeps to word limit of 2,200 Maximum.
The writing ability make a significant contribution to the quality of the report and its usefulness to management. |
Follows Harvard style for in-text citation & Reference ListUse a minimum of 8 sources. The range and sources of the chosen references. Are the basic and from the course text or has wider research been done? |
Content included – identify at least 8 issues with justification and prioritisation.Research into the chosen SME and the potential markets. |
Integration & application of information – Justification of issues, given the chosen SME and the potential markets. Clarity and explanation of the identified issues. How well does this match with the module content? |
Line of argument, development of discussion and instructional verbs to suit the task & level.The line of argument justifying the inclusion of the identified issues and the position in the list. How convincing and useful to management. |
| Marks | |||||
| 90-100
Outstanding |
Outstanding presentation & report structure, with numbered paragraphs, list of contents/figures &appendices.
Articulate & fluent academic writing style with ideas cross referenced. No grammatical / spelling errors. |
Outstanding selection of quality sources, well beyond core & recommended resources.
Outstanding standard of referencing within text & consistent use of Harvard referencing system. Accuracy of in-text references & full details shown in Reference list. |
Outstanding exploration of topic showing outstanding knowledge & understanding through thorough & appropriate research. Impressive choice and range of appropriate content. | Outstanding business insight & application. Outstanding integration of literature/data into work. Very impressive breadth and depth. | Outstanding level of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection.
Highly developed/ focused work, with thorough consideration of all possibilities and aspects of the topic. |
| 80-89
Excellent |
Excellent presentation & report structure, with numbered paragraphs, list of contents/figures, appendices & cross referencing. Articulate & fluent academic writing style. Only minor errors. | Excellent selection of quality sources. Evidence of independent searching beyond core & recommended resources.
Excellent standard of referencing within text & consistent use of Harvard referencing system. Accuracy of in-text references & full details shown in Reference list. |
Excellent level of knowledge & understanding demonstrated.
Evidence of appropriate reading. Covers all relevant points & issues. |
Excellent business insight & application. Excellent integration of literature/data into work. Impressive breadth and depth. | Excellent level of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection. Clearly developed points all of which are relevant to the topic. |
| 70-79
Very Good |
Very good presentation & report structure, paragraphing, use of numbering, list of contents/figures, appendices & cross referencing. Fluent academic writing style. Very few grammatical errors & spelling mistakes. | Very good selection of quality sources beyond the recommended resources. Few irrelevant/poor quality sources used.
Very good standard of referencing within text & consistent use of Harvard referencing system. Accuracy of in-text references & full details shown in Reference list. |
Very good level of knowledge & understanding demonstrated.
Covers most relevant points & issues. Few errors / omissions in content/calculations. |
Very good business insight & application.
Very good integration of literature/data into work. Very good use of literature/data with breadth and depth. |
Very good level of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection. A few less relevant ideas/points or would benefit from further development &/or evaluation/comparison. |
| 60-69
Good |
Good presentation & report structure, use of numbering & appendices.
Writing is mainly good with some flow and spelling &/ or grammatical errors seldom impede understanding. |
Good selection of mostly quality sources but some irrelevant/poor quality sources used beyond the recommended reading.
Good standard of referencing within text & consistent use of Harvard referencing system. Accuracy of in-text references & full details shown in Reference list. |
Good grasp of the topic & some of its implications presented.
Good knowledge & understanding is demonstrated. Minor errors / omissions in content/ calculations. |
Good business insight & application. Good integration of literature/data into work. Good use of literature/data with adequate breadth and depth. | Good level of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection but more ideas/points could be addressed or developed further. |
| 50-59
Clear Pass |
Clear presentation & report structure with paragraphing that is effective for the most part and use of numbering & appendices.
Writing is mainly clear but some spelling &/ or grammatical errors may slightly impede understanding. |
Some quality sources used to clear effect, but some may be inappropriate. Limited attempt to go beyond recommended reading. Harvard referencing system is mostly consistently, though there may be minor inaccuracies. | Sound grasp of the main topic with clear knowledge and understanding of the main issues demonstrated. There may be some errors/omissions in content/calculations | Sound business insight & application.
Integration of literature/data into work. Use of literature/data with some breadth and depth. |
Sound level of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection but some irrelevant points and more ideas/points could be addressed /developed further. |
| 40-49
Marginal Pass |
Satisfactory basic report structure.
Not always written clearly & has grammatical & / or spelling errors which impede understanding. See CASE with feedback |
Satisfactory: Some quality sources used. Research did not go beyond the recommended sources.
Satisfactory referencing within text & some inconsistent use of Harvard referencing system. See CASE/ Information Managers (LRC) with feedback |
Satisfactory content / level of knowledge of the topic. Addresses most of the task. Some errors / omissions in content/ calculations. May benefit from further research. | Satisfactory business insight & application. Limited integration with literature/ data.
Use of literature/data but limited in breadth or depth. |
Satisfactory basic evidence of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection but some points irrelevant or superficially made so need further development.
See CASE with feedback |
| 30-39
Marginal Fail |
Weak report format. Limited or poor structure.
Muddled work with many spelling & / or grammatical errors.
Must see CASE with feedback |
Weak: Limited evidence of appropriate research. Some use made of recommended reading, but the majority of sources are irrelevant/of poor quality.
Weak use of Harvard referencing system with errors & inconsistently applied. Must see CASE/ Information Managers (LRC) with feedback |
Weak: Limited content / knowledge/ calculations. Limited or muddled understanding of the topic/question.
Does not meet all the learning outcomes. |
Weak: Unsatisfactory evidence of business application & insight
Work needs to show better links between practical application and theory. |
Weak: Limited evidence of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation &/or reflection.More development & comment needed. May need to do more than describe.
Must see CASE with feedback |
| 20 – 29
Clear Fail |
Inadequate report format and poor paragraphing / signposting. Inappropriate writing style. Poorly written &/or poor spelling & grammar.
Must see CASE with feedback |
Inadequate: Little evidence of appropriate research. Few quality sources used from recommended reading.
Inadequate use of Harvard referencing with many errors &/or inconsistencies. Must see CASE/ Information Managers (LRC) with feedback |
Inadequate: Lacking in relevant content/ knowledge/calculations. Content irrelevant / inaccurate. Does not meet all the learning outcomes. | Inadequate: Lacks evidence of business application & insight. Some literature irrelevant to topic. | Inadequate: Lacking / inadequate level of discussion/ analysis/critical evaluation & /or reflection. Descriptive.
Must see CASE with feedback |
| 0 – 19
Little or Nothing of merit |
Nothing of merit: Poorly written work, lacking structure, paragraphing / signposting.
Many inaccuracies in spelling & grammar. Must see CASE with feedback |
Nothing of merit: No evidence of research. No use made of recommended reading. Sources are irrelevant & of poor quality. No or little attempt to use the Harvard referencing system.
Must see CASE/ Information Managers (LRC) with feedback |
Nothing of merit: Unsatisfactory level of knowledge demonstrated.
Content used irrelevant / not appropriate/ to the topic. Does not meet the learning outcomes. |
Nothing of merit: No evidence of appropriate business application & insight.
|
Nothing of merit: Unsatisfactory level of discussion/analysis/critical evaluation &/or reflection
Must see CASE with feedback |
| KEY
ACTIONS To achieve a higher grade, next time you need to… (Where to go?) Who can help?)
|
1.
2.
3. |
||||
You must look at the Adapted Generic assessment criteria included below.
Student Support and Guidance
- For further help, contact your module leader in their drop-in hours or by email.
- Use the Grading Criteria and Mark Scheme to help improve your work.
- Go to CASE workshops, use the CASE website and drop-in hours studynet.herts.ac.uk/go/CASE/
- Academic English for Business support is available through daily drop-ins from the CASE office. See the CASE workshop timetable on the CASE main website page for details.
- Make full use of Library search to identify relevant academic material and the ‘Subject Toolkit for Business’ which contains links to other Information Databases and the Information Management contact details. (http://www.studynet1.herts.ac.uk/ptl/common/LIS.nsf/lis/4DAF5390094771C2802575ED004212BF)
- Some tutors allow students to test their work using Turnitin. Guidance on submission to Turnitin via StudyNet can be found by using the following link. http://www.studynet1.herts.ac.uk/ptl/common/asu.nsf/resource+library/TURNITIN+FOR+STUDENTS+2016+USER+GUIDE.pdf/$FILE/TURNITIN+FOR+STUDENTS+2016+USER+GUIDE.pdf
