Semester August 2022 Module Code EVT4205

Module Title Business Tourism and Events

Coursework Structure
Assignment Title
Coursework Submission
Deadline
Individual Report Assignment
70%
(2,500 words ±10%) Weighting
Evaluation on Business Tourism and Events Industry for a Country
Date: 27th November 2022 (Sunday)
Time: 11.59 pm
Submission Method: Softcopy via Blackboard

Assessment Criteria
Learning Outcomes: Knowledge and Understanding tested in this assignment:
List the Outcomes Mapped in Module Guide and Table of Specification
 Explore the synergies between buyers, suppliers and intermediaries of Business Tourism and Business Events
Industries.
 Critically discuss trends which impact on business tourism and business events.
 Evaluate the added value business tourism and business events bring to a location or country.
Learning Outcomes: Skills and Attributes tested in this assignment:
List the Outcomes Mapped in Module Guide and Table of Specification
 Create practical solutions in business events and recognise differences in market segments and
demographics.
 Communicate and present findings of investigative activity into a specific segment of business events in a
structured format.
General Coursework Rules
 Written Assignment must be submitted online through SafeAssign (or other plagiarism checker) via
Blackboard for originality check.
 Oral Presentation must be recorded and securely uploaded to YouTube (or other online video platform) for
moderation purpose. The private link to video must be given to the lecturer during submission.
 Assignment submitted after the deadline will be subject to a penalty. Please refer to the guidelines on
Coursework Submission that can be found in the INTI-UH Student Guidebook.
 Suspected academic misconduct will be handled according to the Policies and Procedures for Academic
Dishonesty and Misconduct that can be found in the INTI-UH Student Guidebook.

Page 1 of 7
 Assignment Brief

ASSIGNMENT: INDIVIDUAL REPORT

Weightage: 70%

Your task is to research and critically evaluate a sector within the business tourism and events industry. You should
choose ONE (1) specific sector from Meetings, Incentive Travels, Conferences, or Exhibitions.

Once you have selected your sector, you need to choose ONE (1) country (except Malaysia) to do an analysis on the
selected sector (e.g., US conference market, UK exhibition market etc.)

You are then required to produce a professional report which could be used by a new company entering the sector.
Your report should analyse the past, present and future context of the sector chosen.

Suggested areas of discussion within your report could include but are not limited to:
 Definitions of the sector/ Overview of market size/ brief historical overview.
 Stakeholder analysis / Specific market profile (e.g., buyers and buyer needs / suppliers / intermediaries /
venues)
 Analysis of industry trends (political, economy, social culture, technology, legal, and environmental)
 Economic impact of the sector to the chosen destination.
 Recommendations and future development and opportunities for the sector.

Your work needs to show evidence for academic theory and application. You also need to include industry examples
in your analysis.

Suggested report structure:

1. UH cover page
2. Table of contents
3. Executive summary
4. Main content
5. Reference List
6. Appendices (not compulsory – you can include graphs, charts, or any supporting information)

Other Specific Instructions for this Assignment

 Font type: Times New Roman
 Font size: 12
 Line spacing: 1.5
 Number the page at the bottom right corner.
 Word count is 2,500 ± 10% (excluding table of content, reference list, and appendices).
 In-text citations and reference list must be accurate and according to Harvard Referencing format.
 Need to provide at least 15 credible sources from academic journals, books, newspapers, and other credible
websites such as government, organisations, companies, etc.
 Cheating, plagiarism, collusion, and other academic misconduct is not allowed.

Page 2 of 7
Student Support and Guidance
 For further help, contact your module leader/lecturer during consultation hours or by email.
 Use the Grading Criteria and Mark Scheme to help improve your work.
 Make full use of Library search to identify relevant academic material and find links to other Information
Databases and the Information Management contact details.
 For HBS students, you may go to CASE website www.studynet.herts.ac.uk/go/CASE/ for more student
support and guidance.

Marking Criteria and Feedback

 Performance will be assessed using UH Grading Criteria and Mark Scheme. These two documents are
attached to this assignment brief.
 Feedback will typically be given within 4 weeks from the submission deadline in a written/typed/verbal
form.

Page 3 of 7
 UG Grading Criteria for HBS Coursework (Report) – Key in the Detailed Tasks in the Marking & Feedback Sheet Below
REPORT Presentation & structure
Outstanding presentation & report
structure, with numbered paragraphs, list
90-100
of contents/figures &appendices.
Articulate & fluent academic writing style
Outstanding
with ideas cross referenced. No
grammatical / spelling errors.
Excellent presentation & report
80-89 structure, with numbered paragraphs, list
of contents/figures, appendices & cross
Excellent referencing. Articulate & fluent academic
writing style. Only minor errors.
Very good presentation & report
structure, paragraphing, use of
70-79
numbering, list of contents/figures,
appendices & cross referencing. Fluent
Very Good
academic writing style. Very few
grammatical errors & spelling mistakes.
Good presentation & report structure,
60-69 use of numbering & appendices.
Writing is mainly good with some flow
Good and spelling &/ or grammatical errors
seldom impede understanding.
Clear presentation & report structure with
paragraphing that is effective for the
50-59 most part and use of numbering &
appendices.
Clear Pass Writing is mainly clear but some spelling
&/ or grammatical errors may slightly
impede understanding.
Satisfactory basic report structure.
40-49
Not always written clearly & has
grammatical & / or spelling errors which
Marginal
impede understanding.
Pass
See CASE/T&L with feedback
Weak report format. Limited or poor
structure.
30-39
Muddled work with many spelling & / or
grammatical errors.
Marginal Fail
Must see CASE/T&L with feedback
Inadequate report format and poor
20 – 29 paragraphing / signposting. Inappropriate
writing style. Poorly written &/or poor
Clear Fail spelling & grammar.
Must see CASE/T&L with feedback
Nothing of merit: Poorly written work,
0 – 19
lacking structure, paragraphing /
signposting.
Little or
Many inaccuracies in spelling &
Nothing of
grammar.
merit
Must see CASE/T&L with feedback
Content/ Terms/ Findings/ Discussion /Analysis /Critical evaluation &/or
Intellectual Curiosity Application & Integration
Definitions/ Calculations Reflection
Outstanding selection of quality sources, well beyond core & Outstanding exploration of topic
Outstanding level of discussion/analysis/ critical
recommended resources. showing outstanding knowledge & Outstanding business insight &
evaluation &/or reflection.
Outstanding standard of referencing within text & consistent use understanding through thorough & application. Outstanding integration of
Highly developed/ focused work, with thorough
of Harvard referencing system. appropriate research. Impressive literature/data into work. Very
consideration of all possibilities and aspects of the
Accuracy of in-text references & full details shown in Reference choice and range of appropriate impressive breadth and depth.
topic.
list. content.
Excellent selection of quality sources. Evidence of independent
searching beyond core & recommended resources. Excellent level of knowledge & Excellent business insight &
Excellent level of discussion/analysis/ critical
Excellent standard of referencing within text & consistent use of understanding demonstrated. application. Excellent integration of
evaluation &/or reflection. Clearly developed points
Harvard referencing system. Evidence of appropriate reading. literature/data into work. Impressive
all of which are relevant to the topic.
Accuracy of in-text references & full details shown in Reference Covers all relevant points & issues. breadth and depth.
list.
Very good selection of quality sources beyond the
recommended resources. Few irrelevant/poor quality sources Very good level of knowledge & Very good business insight &
Very good level of discussion/analysis/ critical
used. understanding demonstrated. application.
evaluation &/or reflection. A few less relevant
Very good standard of referencing within text & consistent use of Covers most relevant points & issues. Very good integration of literature/data
ideas/points or would benefit from further
Harvard referencing system. Few errors / omissions in into work. Very good use of
development &/or evaluation/comparison.
Accuracy of in-text references & full details shown in Reference content/calculations. literature/data with breadth and depth.
list.
Good selection of mostly quality sources but some
Good grasp of the topic & some of its
irrelevant/poor quality sources used beyond the recommended
implications presented. Good business insight & application.
reading. Good level of discussion/analysis/ critical evaluation
Good knowledge & understanding is Good integration of literature/data into
Good standard of referencing within text & consistent use of &/or reflection but more ideas/points could be
demonstrated. work. Good use of literature/data with
Harvard referencing system. addressed or developed further.
Minor errors / omissions in content/ adequate breadth and depth.
Accuracy of in-text references & full details shown in Reference
calculations.
list.
Sound grasp of the main topic with
Some quality sources used to clear effect, but some may be Sound business insight & application. Sound level of discussion/analysis/ critical
clear knowledge and understanding of
inappropriate. Limited attempt to go beyond recommended Integration of literature/data into work. evaluation &/or reflection but some irrelevant points
the main issues demonstrated. There
reading. Harvard referencing system is mostly consistently, Use of literature/data with some and more ideas/points could be addressed
may be some errors/omissions in
though there may be minor inaccuracies. breadth and depth. /developed further.
content/calculations
Satisfactory: Some quality sources used. Research did not go Satisfactory content / level of Satisfactory business insight & Satisfactory basic evidence of discussion/analysis/
beyond the recommended sources. knowledge of the topic. Addresses application. Limited integration with critical evaluation &/or reflection but some points
Satisfactory referencing within text & some inconsistent use of most of the task. Some errors / literature/ data. irrelevant or superficially made so need further
Harvard referencing system. omissions in content/ calculations. May Use of literature/data but limited in development.
Must see CASE/T&L with feedback benefit from further research. breadth or depth. See CASE/T&L with feedback
Weak: Limited evidence of appropriate research. Some use
Weak: Limited content / knowledge/ Weak: Unsatisfactory evidence of Weak: Limited evidence of discussion/analysis/
made of recommended reading, but the majority of sources are
calculations. Limited or muddled business application & insight critical evaluation &/or reflection.More development
irrelevant/of poor quality.
understanding of the topic/question. Work needs to show better links & comment needed. May need to do more than
Weak use of Harvard referencing system with errors &
Does not meet all the learning between practical application and describe.
inconsistently applied.
outcomes. theory. Must see CASE/T&L with feedback
Must see CASE/T&L with feedback
Inadequate: Little evidence of appropriate research. Few quality
Inadequate: Lacking in relevant Inadequate: Lacking / inadequate level of
sources used from recommended reading. Inadequate: Lacks evidence of
content/ knowledge/calculations. discussion/ analysis/critical evaluation & /or
Inadequate use of Harvard referencing with many errors &/or business application & insight. Some
Content irrelevant / inaccurate. Does reflection. Descriptive.
inconsistencies. literature irrelevant to topic.
not meet all the learning outcomes. Must see CASE/T&L with feedback
Must see CASE/T&L with feedback
Nothing of merit: No evidence of research. No use made of Nothing of merit: Unsatisfactory level
Nothing of merit: No evidence of Nothing of merit: Unsatisfactory level of
recommended reading. Sources are irrelevant & of poor quality. of knowledge demonstrated.
appropriate business application & discussion/analysis/critical evaluation &/or reflection
No or little attempt to use the Harvard referencing system. Content used irrelevant / not
insight.
appropriate/ to the topic. Does not
Must see CASE/T&L with feedback
Must see CASE/T&L with feedback meet the learning outcomes.
Page 4 of 7
Page 5 of 7
Individual Report Marking and Feedback Sheet
Assignment Title : Date :
Module Title : Module Code :
Name : ID Number :

Please refer to Grading Criteria for Individual Report when awarding marks (upon 100 marks). Key in the weightage (X%) for each criteria and the detailed tasks and expectations (link to MLO).

Grading Criteria MLO 100m X% Comments / Feedback / Feed Forward

C1. Presentation & structure:
Follows logical structure with good flow; meet the format /100 /10
requirements outlined in the instruction, articulate and fluent academic
writing.
C2. Intellectual curiosity (Quality of academic sources). Use & presentation of
Harvard Referencing
/100 /10
Use a minimum of 10 sources; in-text citations done properly and use
Harvard referencing style.
C3. Content/ Terms/ Findings/ Definitions/ Calculations
Perform full and rich content including problem, background evidence /100 /30
of research and findings; demonstrated competence and knowledge of
the key issues
C4. Application & Integration of Data/Literature
Articulate appropriate and relevant data; clear tables and charts with /100 /20
accurate data to support findings
C5. Discussion /Analysis /Critical evaluation &/or Reflection
Express a strong, focused argument, well supported by impressive /100 /30
analysis and evidence, provide relevant and achievable
recommendations; represents well critical thinking skills

Total (Assessor) /100

Total (Peer Reviewer/Moderator) /100

UH Internal Moderator Comments External Examiner Comments (if applicable)

Page 6 of 7
Page 7 of 7