Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Assessment Brief MB405
Assessment Brief MB405
9. University Regulations for (All assessments are subject to the University Regulations for
Assessment Assessment, and to the regulations of the Undergraduate Modular
Scheme / Postgraduate Modular Scheme. These include regulations
relating to Errors of Attribution and Assessment Offences. In
exercising their judgement, Examiners may penalise any work where
the standard of English, numeracy or presentation adversely affects the
quality of the work, or where the work submitted exceeds the published
size or time limits, or where the work fails to follow normal academic
conventions for acknowledging sources.
1
10. The requirements for the assessment
You are required to keep a portfolio that addresses the following questions.
1. What did you know about this topic prior to the class and what did you want to learn?
2. What were the key ideas that you learned from this session?
3. What concepts did you find difficult? How are you planning to improve your understanding of
these concepts?
4. Identify an academic journal or book chapter (in addition to course text) based on the content
of the weeks class and provide a summary of the key learning points from the article/chapter
in your own words.
For the final session you will need to reflect on the module as a whole indicating the value of the
module to your development as a potential manager, which topics interested you the most and why
and which topics caused you the most difficulty and why and how you addressed this.
You need to complete this task weekly. You will be asked to submit your portfolio at regular intervals
for scrutiny by module team. You will receive feedback on your portfolio and will be expected to take
this into account for subsequent entries. At the end of the course you can choose which 4 entries are
marked. To pass this element of the assessment you need to submit a portfolio containing at least
seven entries plus the final reflection.
Toyota Haier
Airbus British Airways
Sony-Erickson Marks and Spencer
Ikea HSBC
SAB Miller TUI
Cadburys Tata Steel
You are required to select one of the above companies in class and write a report (3000 words) in
which you address the following issues:
• Type of organisation and its scope
• The key external environmental issues (both general and competitive) impacting the
organization in 2010 and beyond
• The organization’s market position and its segmentation in 2010
• The key opportunities and threats/challenges facing the organization in 2010 with a
rationale for their selection
• The role and purpose of scenarios as a management tool illustrating your answer with
an example of a scenario for your organization based upon the key challenges
generated in task 2.
You will do a 15 minute presentation on your company (10 minutes content and 5 minutes for
questions) which seeks to address the above questions. You will receive formative feedback on both
the content and delivery of the presentation. This will contribute 10% of the marks for the report. The
other 50% of the marks will be awarded for the written report. In order to pass this task you must
complete both the presentation and the written report.
11. Assessment criteria
The report will be assessed using the standard assessment criteria attached to this assignment.
Separate criteria will be issued for the portfolio and presentation.
2
12. Special instructions
Careful referencing of sources is vital when making use of the work of others. You are expected to
employ the referencing conventions recommended in the Course. These conventions apply to
information taken from internet sources, as well as books, journals and lectures. If you are unsure of
the way to reference properly, seek advice from a member of staff before you submit the assessment.
These are some of the points you should check before submitting your work:
• are all direct quotations, from both primary and secondary sources, suitably acknowledged
(placed in quotation marks or indented)?
• have you provided full details of the source of the quotation, according to the referencing
convention used in the Course?
• have you acknowledged the source of ideas not your own, even if you are not quoting directly
from the source?
• have you avoided close paraphrase from sources? (Check that you are not presenting other
people’s words or phrasing as if they are your own.)
• if you have worked closely with others in preparing for this assessment, is the material you are
presenting sufficiently your own?
3
• Acceptable quality of attribution and referencing
• Reasonably thorough and logical analysis
• Some critical perspective
• Reasonable conclusions that are not fully
substantiated by the analysis and findings
• The assignment aims partially fulfilled by the
conclusions, with some thoughtful
commentary
• Reasonable integration of analysis and
argument
• The document acceptably written and presented
Just acceptable but Between 40 and • Lack of clarity in the definition and introduction
needing improvement in 49 of the topic
many areas • The assignment aims not clearly stated
• Some evidence of reasonable breadth and
selectivity of reading
• Some appropriate theoretical frameworks
chosen, rather poorly applied
• Rather poor quality of attribution and referencing
• Reasonable analysis but some gaps in logic
• Lacking in critical perspective
• Conclusions that are not fully substantiated by
the analysis and findings
• The assignment aims only partially fulfilled by
the conclusions, insufficient commentary
• Weak integration of analysis and argument
• The document rather poorly written and
presented
Unacceptably weak – full Between 30 and • Lack of clarity in the definition and introduction
resubmission required 39 of the topic
• The assignment aims not clearly stated
• Insufficient evidence of breadth and selectivity of
reading
• Theoretical frameworks inappropriately chosen,
and /or poorly applied
• Very poor quality of attribution and referencing
• Some reasonable analysis but gaps in logic
• Absence of critical perspective
• Conclusions that are not substantiated by the
analysis and findings
• The assignment aims not fulfilled by the
conclusions, little or no commentary
• Weak integration of analysis and argument
• The document poorly written and presented
Outright fail, requiring Below 30 • The topic very poorly defined and introduced
module to be taken again • The assignment aims missing or weakly
developed
• Very little evidence of appropriate reading
• Theoretical frameworks inappropriately chosen,
and /or poorly applied
• Very poor quality of attribution and referencing
• Very weak analysis with many gaps in logic
• Complete lack of critical perspective
• Very weak conclusions that are not
substantiated by the analysis and findings
• The assignment aims not fulfilled by the
conclusions, no commentary
• Very weak integration of analysis and argument
• The document very poorly written and presented
4
5