Semester APRIL 2023 Module Code MGT3220

Module Title CROSS CULTURAL MANAGEMENT

Assignment
Coursework Structure Report (2,500 words) 50%
Weighting
Assignment Title Individual essay
Coursework Submission Date: 10 June 2023 by 23.59 pm
Deadline Method: Turnitin via Canvas

Assessment Criteria
Learning Outcomes: Knowledge and Understanding tested in this assignment:
List the Outcomes Mapped in Module Guide and Table of Specification
 Analyse the concept of culture and its relevance to issues of management and organisational behaviour;
 Illustrate the importance of awareness and sensitivity to their own and others' cultural background and
influences
 Highlight the key issues influencing cultural difference, which may affect leadership and motivation,
communications and negotiating, decision-making and organisational relationships generally;
 Differentiate the techniques for managing cross-cultural teams for high performance.
Learning Outcomes: Skills and Attributes tested in this assignment:
List the Outcomes Mapped in Module Guide and Table of Specification
 Develop critical, analytical and practical skills necessary to evaluate theoretical, empirical information
and different approaches to cross-cultural management;
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 8
 Assignment Brief
Literature Review
1. Source a business-related article published between 2018 and 2022 that exhibits cross-cultural differences
between individuals, groups or organisations. For example, look for cross-cultural issues/problems in
communication, negotiation, ethics, business etiquette, etc between two countries.

2. Submit that article to your lecturer for approval via e-mail by Week 3-4. Please choose the article that is
unique and not similar to others. Your lecturer will inform you whether it is accepted or rejected. If rejected,
you have to look for a new article.

3. Write a literature review essay of 2,500 +/- 10% words on that article with elaboration that includes:
- Formal literature review/critique:
 Identify and understood the article’s main thesis statement or hypothesis.
 Identify evidence that the author has provided in the article to justify their argument (both for and
against).
 Perform additional external academic research to find other references and sources that support or
detract from the overall hypothesis in the article.
 A conclusion on whether you agree or disagree with the author’s point of view and provide a summary
of the reasons or justification to support your case.
-Additional guide:
 Introduction – Introduce the general issue and its importance. Identify key trends or perspectives. Identify the
specific focus of this literature review. Give a brief outline of the structure of the body.
 Body – Develop themes, highlighting major concepts, influential studies, etc. in relation to your topic. Focus on
areas of agreement, disagreements, tensions and contentious issues related to your topic. Use strong
sentences at the beginning of each paragraph so the reader can clearly identify the theme or aspect of the
theme being discussed.
 Conclusion – Summarize major contributions in the literature, in the context of the particular focus mentioned in
the introduction. Conclude by summing up and identifying the significance of the topics in relation to the
literature.

Other Specific Instructions for this Assignment

A. The essay must be within 2500 +/- 10% words, and must be type-written with the following format:
 Font type: Arial or Times New Roman
 Font size: 11 or 12
 Line spacing: 1.5 or 2
 Page number on each page (Footer).
 Print on A4 white paper, one sided.

B. The essay should include at least 10 quality references (journals, books or reviews)

C. Your essay with Contents and References must be submitted to Turnitin through Canvas. Overall,
the paper must be below 25% in similarity, and below 5% for each source.
D. Your essay should include:
 Cover Page
 Marking Rubric
 Individual Essay Marking and Feedback Sheet
 Table of Content
 Essay/Literature Review
 Appendix (must include Original Article)
 List of References
 Turnitin (Overall Similarity & various sources)

Page 2 of 8
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 8
 CENTRE FOR UNIVERSITY OF HERTFORDSHIRE PROGRAMMES

Assignment Cover Page

Module
Module Title: Cross-cultural Management MGT 3220
Code:
Assignment
Individual Essay Date:
Title:
Student Information: (Do not include your name unless your tutor has told you to do
so.)
Name* Student ID*

 I (we) have submitted one printed copy of my (our) assignment bound together
AND one electronic version via Black Board.
 I (we) have read through my (our) work and to check for errors in spelling and
grammar.
 I (we) are happy for my (our) work to be shared with future students.

*Tick () the box next to your name, agreeing to the ‘Academic Conduct’
Statement.

I (We) certify that this piece of in-course assignment is my (our) own work, that it
has not been copied from elsewhere, and that any extracts from books, papers or
other sources have been properly acknowledged as references or quotations. In
addition, I(we) agree that the electronic version of this assignment may be subject
to electronic analysis for the detection of collusion, plagiarism and other forms of
unfair advantage.

Page 4 of 8
 UG Grading Criteria for HBS Coursework (ESSAY)
ESSAY Presentation & structure
90-100 Outstanding presentation
& essay structure, with
Outstanding flowing paragraphs.
Articulate & fluent
academic writing style
No grammatical / spelling
errors.
80-89 Excellent presentation &
essay structure, with
Excellent flowing paragraphs.
Articulate & fluent
academic writing style.
Only minor errors.
70-79 Very good presentation &
essay structure, with
Very Good flowing paragraphs.
Fluent academic writing
style.
Very few grammatical
errors & spelling
mistakes.
60-69 Good presentation &
essay structure with
Good effective paragraphing.
Writing is mainly good
with some flow and
spelling/grammar errors
seldom impede
understanding
50-59 Clear presentation and
sound essay structure
Clear Pass with paragraphing that is
effective for the most part.
Writing is mainly clear, but
errors may slightly impede
understanding
Intellectual curiosity Content/ Terms/ Breadth / Depth / Integra Discussion/Analysis/Critical
Use & presentation of Findings/ Definitions/ tion of Literature evaluation &/or Reflection
Harvard Referencing Calculations
Outstanding selection Outstanding exploration Outstanding business in Outstanding level of discussion/
of quality sources, well of topic showing outstan sight & application. Outst analysis/ critical evaluation &/or
beyond core & recomm ding knowledge & under anding integration of liter reflection.
ended resources. standing through thorou ature/data into work. Highly developed/ focused
Outstanding standard o gh & appropriate researc Very impressive breadth work.
f referencing within text h. and depth.
& consistent use of Har Impressive choice and r
vard referencing syste ange of appropriate cont
m. Accuracy of in-text r ent.
eferences & full details
shown in Reference lis
t.
Excellent selection of q Excellent level of Excellent business Excellent level of discussion/
uality sources. Evidenc knowledge & insight & application. analysis/ critical evaluation &
e of independent searc understanding Excellent integration of /or reflection. Clearly
hing beyond core & rec demonstrated. literature/data into work. developed points all of which
ommended resources. Evidence of appropriate Impressive breadth and are relevant to the topic.
Excellent standard of r reading. depth.
eferencing within text & Covers all relevant
consistent use of Harv points & issues.
ard referencing syste
m. Accuracy of in-text r
eferences & full details
shown in Reference lis
t.
Very good selection of Very good level of knowl Very good business Very good level of
mostly quality sources edge & understanding d insight & application. discussion/analysis/ critical
beyond the recommen emonstrated. Literature/data is evaluation &/or reflection.
ded resources. Few irr Covers most relevant poi integrated in a way that A few less relevant ideas/
elevant/poor quality so nts & issues. demonstrates very good points or would benefit from
urces used. Very good Few errors / omissions i breadth and depth of further development &/or
standard of referencing n content/calculations. understanding. evaluation/comparison.
within text & consistent
use of Harvard referen
cing system. Accuracy
of in-text references & f
ull details shown in Ref
erence list.
Good selection of quali Good grasp of the topic Good business insight & Good level of discussion/
ty sources but some irr & some of its application. Literature analysis/ critical evaluation &
elevant/poor quality so implications presented. /data is integrated in a /or reflection but more ideas/
urces used beyond the Good knowledge & way that demonstrates points could be addressed /
recommended reading. understanding is good breadth and depth developed further.
Good standard of refer demonstrated. of understanding.
encing within text & co Minor errors / omissions
nsistent use of Harvard in content/ calculations.
referencing system. Ac
curacy of in-text refere
nces & full details show
n in Reference list.
Some quality sources u Sound grasp of the main Sound business insight Sound level of discussion/
sed to clear effect, but topic with clear & application. analysis/ critical evaluation &
some may be inapprop knowledge and Literature/data is /or reflection but some
riate. Limited attempt t understanding of main integrated in a way that irrelevant points and more
o go beyond recomme issues demonstrated. demonstrates clear ideas/points could be
nded reading. Harvard There may be some understanding. addressed /developed
referencing system is errors/omissions in further.
mostly consistently, tho content/calculations
ugh there may be mino
r inaccuracies.
Page 5 of 8
ESSAY Presentation & structure
40-49 Satisfactory: Basic essay
structure.
Marginal Pass Not always written clearly
& has grammatical & / or
spelling errors which
impede understanding.
See CASE/T&L with
feedback
30-39 Weak essay format.
Limited or poor structure.
Marginal Fail Muddled work with many
spelling & / or
grammatical errors.
Must see CASE/T&L with
feedback
20 – 29 Inadequate essay format
& poor paragraphing / sig
Clear Fail nposting.
Inappropriate writing style
Poorly written &/or poor s
pelling & grammar.
Must see CASE/T&L with
feedback
0 – 19 Nothing of merit: Poorly w
ritten work, lacking structu
Little or Nothing re, paragraphing / signpos
of merit ting.
Many inaccuracies in spell
ing & grammar.
Must see CASE/T&L with
feedback
Intellectual curiosity Content/ Terms/ Breadth / Depth / Integra Discussion/Analysis/Critical
Use & presentation of Findings/ Definitions/ tion of Literature evaluation &/or Reflection
Harvard Referencing Calculations
Satisfactory: Some Satisfactory content / Satisfactory business Satisfactory: Basic evidence
quality sources used. level of knowledge of the insight & application. of discussion/analysis/ critical
Research did not go topic. Addresses most Limited integration with evaluation &/or reflection but
beyond the of the task. Some literature/ data. some points superficially
recommended errors / omissions in Use of literature/data but made so need further
sources. Satisfactory content/ calculations. limited in breadth OR development.
referencing within text May benefit from further depth. See CASE/T&L with feed
& some inconsistent research. back
use of Harvard
referencing system.
See CASE/ T&L with fe
edback
Weak: Limited Weak: Limited content / Weak: Unsatisfactory Weak: Limited evidence of
evidence of knowledge/ calculations. evidence of business discussion/ analysis/ critical
appropriate research. Limited or muddled application & insight evaluation &/or reflection.
Some use made of understanding of the Work needs to show More development &
recommended reading, topic/question. better links between comment needed. May
but the majority of Does not meet all the practical application & need to do more than
sources are learning outcomes. theory. describe.
irrelevant/of poor Must see CASE/T&L with
quality. Weak use of feedback
Harvard referencing
system with errors &
inconsistently applied.
Must see CASE/ T&L
with feedback
Inadequate: Little evide Inadequate: Lacking in Inadequate: Lacks Inadequate: Lacking / inadequate
nce of appropriate rese relevant content/ evidence of business level of discussion/ analysis/critical
arch. Few quality sourc knowledge/calculations. application & insight. evaluation & /or reflection. Descriptive.
es used from recomme Content irrelevant / Some literature Must see CASE/T&L with feedback
nded reading. Inadequ inaccurate. Does not irrelevant to topic.
ate use of Harvard refe meet all the learning
rencing with many erro outcomes.
rs &/or inconsistencies.
Must see CASE/ T&L
with feedback
Nothing of merit: No ev Nothing of merit: Unsatis Nothing of merit: No evid Nothing of merit: Unsatisfactory
idence of research. No factory level of knowledg ence of appropriate busi level of discussion/analysis/critical
use made of recomme e demonstrated. ness application & insigh evaluation &/or reflection
nded reading. Sources Content used irrelevant / t.
are irrelevant & of poor not appropriate/ to the Must see CASE/T&L with feedback
quality. No or little atte topic. Does not meet the
mpt to use the recomm learning outcomes.
ended Harvard referen
cing system.
Must see CASE/ T&L
with feedback
Page 6 of 8
Individual Essay Marking and Feedback Sheet
Assignment Title : Individual Essay Date :
Module Title : Cross Cultural Management Module Code : MGT3220
Name : ID Number :

Please refer to Grading Criteria for Essay when awarding marks (upon 100). 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:
Outlook of the essay, formatting,
grammar and keeps within 2500 word
limit. LO1 /100 /10

C2. Intellectual curiosity (Quality of ac

ademic sources). Use & presentation of
Harvard Referencing
LO1
Use of at least ten (10) quality
references and follows Harvard style of LO2 /100 /15
in-text citation and Reference List
C3. Content/Terms/ Findings
LO3 /100 /20
LO5
C4. Breadth/Depth/Integration of
Literature
. LO4 /100 /30
C5. Discussion / Analysis / Critical
evaluation /Reflection
LO1 /100 /25

Total (Assessor)
/100

Total (Peer Reviewer/Moderator)

/100
UH Internal Moderator Comments External Examiner Comments (if applicable)

Page 7 of 8
Page 8 of 8