Economics Enterprise
BCOBN123 ECONOMICS AND ENTERPRISE Final Assignment Task brief & rubrics
Task
This task is worth 40% of your overall grade for this subject and substitutes the final exam.
Due date:
Formalities
· Minimum length of the assignment 1500 words – Maximum 2000 words.
· Essay form
· Relate your answers to the concepts delivered in class.
· Font: Arial 12,5pts. Line-spacing: default. Text-align: Justified.
· Bibliography/References in Harvard style.
· You may use Appendixes. These and the References do not count for the total wordcount.
Look at the following discussion topic and answer the related questions:
Topic
Dibimilano (http://www.dibimilano.it/) is one of the brands of the company Alfaparf Group. (http://www.alfaparfgroup.com/) They have a presence in many markets / Europe, North America, Brazil, Russia, China and they have recently established a regional office for the Gulf Area in Dubai in the UAE. Their biggest market, though, in this area is Saudi Arabia and the company is coming under pressure from the Saudi Ministry of Trade to relocate its Gulf office to Riyadh.
Question 1
Identify the economic indicators you consider would be of most relevance to the company in making a decision like this and use them to compare the two economies. (Related to the first evaluation criteria – see table below)
Question 2
Consider the political stability of both countries – what factors contribute to its stability/volatility? (Related to the second evaluation criteria – see table below)
Question 3
Analyse the market for beauty treatments in the two countries and compare the needs of the women for dibimilano products and services. (Related to the third evaluation criteria – see table below)
Question 4
On the basis of your analysis, recommend whether dibimilano should maintain their headquarters in Dubai, move them to Riyadh or look for another alternative. Remember to support your conclusions with your previous analysis.
It assesses the following learning outcomes:
· Critically examine economic principles used in managerial situations. Topics: global interdependence and the benefits of trade and the impact of exchange rates.
· Evaluate, analyze and contrast economic decisions and their impact of the global business context.
Rubrics
|
|
Excellent 90-100% |
Good 80-89% |
Fair 70-79% |
Marginal fail 60-69% |
Fail <60% |
|
Relates the case to the specific knowledge delivered (20%) |
Demonstrates exceptional knowledge and understanding of concepts. |
Demonstrate good knowledge and understanding of key concepts- |
The report demonstrates a satisfactory level of knowledge and understanding of concepts at this basic level. |
Demonstrates limited knowledge and understanding of the key concepts. |
Demonstrates extremely poor knowledge and lack of understanding of the key concepts. |
|
Application (30%) |
All analytical tools are applied very well, and highly relevant insight is drawn from them. |
Most analytical tools are applied well, and relevant insight is drawn from them. |
Some analytical tools are applied well although there may be some minor misunderstandings. Some relevant insight may be drawn. |
Some misunderstandings may be in evidence for one or two tools. Limited insight drawn from analysis. |
There is almost no attempt to apply tools |
|
Evaluation (40%) |
There is exceptional evidence of evaluation and justification of recommendations |
There is some good evidence of evaluations of concepts and justification of recommendations |
There is some evidence of evaluation of the concepts and justification of recommendations |
There is little evidence of evaluation of concepts and justification of recommendations |
There is virtually no evidence of evaluation of concepts and justification of recommendations |
|
Critical skills (X%)
|
Exceptional critical engagement using a range of sound, literature and data-based criteria to assess the effects Exceptional critical engagement and analysis of complex ideas. Excellent conclusions based on evaluation. |
Good critical engagement using some sound, literature and data-based criteria to assess the effects
Good critical engagement and analysis of complex ideas.
Well justified conclusions based on evaluation.
|
Fair critical engagement using some criteria but the links to literature or data of these is not mentioned.
Fair critical engagement and analysis of some ideas.
Fair conclusions somewhat based on evaluation. |
Marginally inadequate critical engagement.
Scarce attempt to question the concepts and analyze facts.
Conclusions are very short and loosely linked to the data and facts. |
Inadequate critical engagement.
Concepts and case completely taken at face value
No conclusions or conclusions are completely unrelated to evaluation. |
|
Communication (10%) |
The assignment is communicated extremely coherently, and referencing is accurate throughout |
The assignment is communicated quite clearly, and referencing is accurate but there are some issues in terms of spelling and structure |
The assignment communicates the ideas in a mostly coherent way but there are some errors and some errors in referencing which are not accurate |
The assignment is understandable but is communicated poorly and referencing is inaccurate |
The assignment is extremely poor in terms of referencing (inaccurate or absent) and tends to be incoherent or insufficient (length) in terms of conveying ideas |