Business project

Criteria

Higher Distinction 85%+

Distinction 75% – 84%

Credit 65% – 74%

Pass 50% – 64%

Fail 0 – 49%

Clarity of Research Problem

10 points

The research problem is clearly and completely stated in terms of the market, players, and environment. The importance of the problem is compellingly established and a full explanation provided of why the research is required.

Mark: 10 – 8.5

The research problem is competently stated in terms of the market, players, and environment. The importance of the problem is established and a full explanation provided of why the research is required.

Mark: 8.4 – 7.5

The research problem is stated in terms of the market, players, and environment. The importance of the problem is discussed and an explanation provided of why the research is required.

Mark: 7.4 – 6.5

The research problem is stated. An attempt has been made to discuss the importance of the problem and to explain why the research is required.

Mark: 6.4 – 5.0

The research problem is not stated. No, or a poor, attempt has been made to discuss the importance of the research.

Mark: 4.9 – 0

Clarification

of the Research

Objectives/Aims

20 points

A full explanation of what is to be accomplished by the research is provided. The research objectives are clearly described and thoroughly address the stated research problem. A clear statement of the nature of information to be provided by the proposed research is given.

Mark: 20 – 17

What is to be accomplished by the research is explained. The research objectives are described and thoroughly address the stated research problem. A statement of the nature of information to be provided by the proposed research is given.

Mark: 16.9 – 15

Some explanation of what is to be accomplished by the research is provided. Some attempt has been made to describe the research objectives, which address the stated research problem. The nature of information to be provided by the proposed research is discussed.

Mark: 14.9 – 13

Some explanation of what is to be accomplished by the research is provided.

Mark: 12.9 – 10

No explanation of what is to be accomplished by the research is provided. No attempt has been made to provide specific questions to be asked and answered and the kinds of answers expected. The nature of information to be provided by the proposed research is not discussed.

Mark: 9.9 – 0

Theoretical Framework

20 points

Appropriate theories, frameworks, and concepts have been identified from previous published work, text books, and journal articles. The role and applications of these theories in addressing the identified research problem are well-justified and clearly explained.

Mark: 20 – 17

Some theories, frameworks, and concepts have been identified from previous published work, text books, and journal articles. The role and applications of these theories in addressing the identified research problem is explained.

Mark: 16.9 – 15

A satisfactory attempt has been made to identify theories, frameworks, and concepts from previous published work, text books, and journal articles. The role and applications of these theories in addressing the identified research problem are discussed.

Mark: 14.9 – 13

An attempt has been made to identify theories, frameworks, and concepts from previous published work, text books, and journal articles. Some attempt to discuss the role and applications of these theories in addressing the identified research problem has been made.

Mark: 12.9 – 10

Little, or no, attempt has been made to identify theories, frameworks, and concepts from previous published work, text books, and journal articles. No attempt to discuss the role and applications of these theories in addressing the identified research problem has been made.

Mark: 9.9 – 0

Research Design

Data Collection Data Analysis

30 points

An appropriate methodology, qualitative and/or quantitative, is identified and justified with reference to the suggested theoretical framework. A detailed explanation and justification of the sample to be used, unit of analysis, and the timing and location of fieldwork is provided. Limitations of the study are suggested.

Mark: 30 – 25.5

An appropriate methodology, qualitative and/or quantitative, is identified with reference to the suggested theoretical framework. An explanation and justification of the sample to be used, unit of analysis, and the timing and location of fieldwork is provided. Limitations of the study are suggested.

Mark: 25.4 – 22.5

A methodology, qualitative and/or quantitative, is identified with reference to the suggested theoretical framework. An explanation of the sample to be used, unit of analysis, and the timing and location of fieldwork is provided. Some limitations of the study are suggested.

Mark: 22.4 – 19.5

The research design is discussed, with some reference to the suggested theoretical framework. Some explanation of the sample to be used, unit of analysis, and the timing and location of fieldwork is provided. Some limitations of the study are suggested.

Mark: 19.4 – 15

The research design is not discussed, or is inadequately discussed. No, or a poor, explanation of the sample to be used, unit of analysis, and the timing and location of fieldwork is provided. Limitations of the study are not addressed.

Mark: 14.9 – 0

Planning and

Professionalism

20 points

A clear project plan, in which required resources and key activities are identified, is provided. The plan is realistic and achievable. The page limit is observed and material is fully referenced. The proposal was submitted on time and in the correct format.

Mark: 20 – 17

A project plan, in which required resources and key activities are identified, is provided. The plan is realistic and achievable. The page limit is observed and material is fully referenced. The proposal was submitted on time and in the correct format.

Mark: 16.9 – 15

A project plan is provided. The plan is realistic and achievable. The page limit is observed and material is referenced. The proposal was submitted on time and in the correct format.

Mark: 14.9 – 13

A project plan has been attempted. The plan is realistic and achievable. The page limit is observed and most material is referenced. The proposal was submitted on time and in the correct format.

Mark: 12.9 – 10

No, or a poor, project plan is provided. The plan is not realistic and/or achievable. The page limit is not observed and material is not fully referenced. The proposal was not submitted on time and/or in the correct format.

Mark: 9.9 – 0

Criteria

Higher Distinction 85%+

Distinction 75% – 84%

Credit 65% – 74%

Pass 50% – 64%

Fail 0 – 49%

Insight and understanding of company (business situation), customers (current and potential), and competitors (market)

20 points

The report demonstrates high level of understanding regarding the key issues relating to the topic / problem. The market / business environment is extensively researched, clearly outlined, and appropriately interpreted.

Mark: 20 – 17

The report demonstrates a solid level of understanding regarding the key issues relating to the topic / problem. The market / business environment is well-researched, clearly outlined, and appropriately interpreted. Mark: 16.9 – 15

The report demonstrates a satisfactory level of understanding regarding the key issues relating to the topic / problem. The market / business environment is adequately researched, outlined, and interpreted. Mark: 14.9 – 13

The report demonstrates an understanding regarding the key issues relating to the topic / problem. Some attempt has been made to research, outline, and interpret the market / business environment.

Mark: 12.9 – 10

The report demonstrates little, or no, understanding regarding the key issues relating to the topic / problem. No, or a poor, attempt has been made to research, outline, and interpret the market / business environment.

Mark: 9.9 – 0

Understanding, analysis, and application of key marketing theories

(PLO 2.1)

10 points

The report demonstrates a high level of understanding and thorough critical analysis of relevant marketing theories, and an explanation of how they apply to the project and the data. The limitations of the theories are clearly articulated and the consequences of this for recommendations are discussed.

Mark: 10 – 8.5

The report demonstrates a solid level of understanding and good critical analysis of relevant marketing theories, and an explanation of how they apply to the project and the data. The limitations of the theories are articulated and the consequences of this for recommendations are considered.

Mark: 8.4 – 7.5

The report demonstrates a satisfactory level of understanding and critical analysis of relevant marketing theories, and an explanation of how they apply to the project and the data. Some attempt has been made to discuss the limitations of the theories and associated consequences of this for any recommendations made.

Mark: 7.4 – 6.5

The report demonstrates an understanding and analysis of relevant marketing theories, and an explanation of how they apply to the project and the data.

Mark: 6.4 – 5

The report demonstrates a poor understanding and analysis of relevant marketing theories, and no, or poor, explanation of how they apply to the project and the data.

Mark: 4.9 – 0

Research

design and implementation

(PLO 5.2)

10 points

The report clearly demonstrates an ability to design and implement research to a high level, in accordance with project aims, project constraints, and relevant ethics frameworks.

Mark: 10 – 8.5

The report demonstrates an ability to design and implement research to a solid level, in accordance with project aims, project constraints, and relevant ethics frameworks.

Mark: 8.4 – 7.5

The report demonstrates an ability to design and implement research, in accordance with project aims, project constraints, and relevant ethics frameworks.

Mark: 7.4 – 6.5

The report demonstrates an ability to design and implement research to an adequate level, with some consideration of the project aims, project constraints, and relevant ethics frameworks.

Mark: 6.4 – 5

The report does not demonstrate an ability to design and implement research. Little, or no, consideration has been given to the project aims, project constraints, and relevant ethics frameworks.

Mark: 4.9 – 0

Data Analysis

Data Interpretation

AND

Recommend-ations

(PLO 5.1)

45 points

The report demonstrates a high-level of understanding of key issues regarding qualitative and/or quantitative data collection methods, data analysis, and interpretation. The recommendations made are insightful and feasible in terms of implementation.

Mark: 45 – 38.25

The report demonstrates a solid understanding of key issues regarding qualitative and/or quantitative data collection methods, data analysis, and interpretation. The recommendations made are thoughtful and feasible in terms of implementation.

Mark: 38.24 – 33.75

The report demonstrates a satisfactory understanding regarding qualitative and/or quantitative data collection methods, analysis, and interpretation. The recommendations made are sound and feasible in terms of implementation.

`

Mark: 33.74 – 29.25

The report demonstrates an understanding regarding qualitative and/or quantitative data collection methods, analysis, and interpretation. The recommendations made are feasible in terms of implementation.

Mark: 29.24 – 22.5

The report demonstrates a poor, or no, understanding regarding qualitative and/or quantitative data collection methods, analysis, and interpretation. The recommendations made are not well-thought through and/or not feasible in terms of implementation.

Mark: 22.4 – 0

Video Summary

(PLO 3.2)

10 points

The research project is clearly and completely summarized in terms of the main components discussed in the course. The video is the appropriate length (1 minute).

Mark: 10 – 8.5

The research project is competently summarized in terms of the main components discussed in the course. The video is the appropriate length (1 minute).

Mark: 8.4 – 7.5

The research project is summarized. The video is not the appropriate length (1 minute).

Mark: 7.4 – 6.5

An attempt to summarize the research project is made. The video is not the appropriate length (1 minute).

Mark: 6.4 – 5.0

The research project is not summarized or a very poor attempt has been made. The video is not at all the appropriate length (1 minute).

Mark: 4.9 – 0

Professionalism

5 points

Page limit guidelines are observed. The report is well-structured and adheres to formatting requirements. Material is fully referenced using UTS Harvard style. There are no technical errors. The report was submitted in the correct format.

Mark: 5 – 4.25

Page limit guidelines are observed. The report is structured and adheres to formatting requirements. Material is referenced using UTS Harvard style. There are very few technical errors. The report was submitted in the correct format.

Mark: 4.24 – 3.75

Page limit guidelines are observed. The report is adequately structured and adheres to formatting requirements. Most material is referenced using UTS Harvard style. There are few technical errors. The report was submitted in the correct format.

Mark: 3.74 – 3.25

Page limit guidelines are observed. The report is structured and adheres to formatting requirements. Some material is referenced. There are technical errors. The report was submitted in the correct format.

Mark: 3.24 – 2.50

Page limit guidelines are not observed. The report is poorly structured and fails to adhere to formatting requirements. Material is not referenced appropriately. There are many technical errors. The report was not submitted in the correct format.

Mark: 2.49 – 0

Criteria

Higher Distinction 85%+

Distinction 75% – 84%

Credit 65% – 74%

Pass 50% – 64%

Fail 0 – 49%

Critical review of the project process and associated challenges

40 points

The report provides an insightful and engaging critical discussion regarding the challenges faced during the project process. Further, some unique, valuable insights are provided in terms of what has been learned from these challenges and the application of this learning process to future business practice. The report also offers an appraisal of how well the project performed against initial objectives.

Mark: 40 – 34

The report provides an insightful, critical discussion regarding the challenges faced during the project process. Further, some valuable insights are provided in terms of what has been learned from these challenges and the application of this learning process to future business practice. The report also offers a discussion regarding how well the project performed against initial objectives.

Mark: 33.9 – 30

The report provides an insightful discussion regarding the challenges faced during the project process. Further, some thoughts are provided in terms of what has been learned from these challenges and the application of this learning process to future business practice. The report considers how well the project performed against initial objectives.

Mark: 29.9 – 26

The report provides a discussion regarding the challenges faced during the project process. Further, an attempt has been made to offer some thoughts regarding what has been learned from these challenges. Some attempt is made to consider how well the project performed against initial objectives.

Mark: 25.9 – 20

The report fails to provide an adequate discussion regarding the challenges faced during the project process. Further, little, or no, attempt has been made to offer thoughts regarding what has been learned from these challenges. Little, or no, attempt is made to consider how well the project performed against initial objectives.

Mark: 19.9 – 0

Applying Theory to Practice

20 points

The report offers an insightful and engaging discussion regarding the way in which academic theories, concepts, and frameworks inform business practice.

Mark: 40 – 34

The report offers an insightful discussion regarding the way in which academic theories, concepts, and frameworks inform business practice.

Mark: 33.9 – 30

The report offers a satisfactory discussion regarding the way in which academic theories, concepts, and frameworks inform business practice.

Mark: 29.9 – 26

The report offers a discussion regarding the way in which academic theories, concepts, and frameworks inform business practice.

Mark: 25.9 – 20

The report offers a poor discussion regarding the way in which academic theories, concepts, and frameworks inform business practice, or no discussion regarding this at all.

Mark: 19.9 – 0

How to Relate project to Ethical and Social Responsibility

(PLO 4.1)

10 points

The report clearly and completely relates the project to ethical and social responsibility.

Mark: 10 – 8.5

The report competently relates the project to ethical and social responsibility.

Mark: 8.4 – 7.5

The report offers some recommendations for how the project can relate to ethical and social responsibility.

Mark: 7.4 – 6.5

An attempt is made to relate the project with ethical and social responsibility.

Mark: 6.4 – 5.0

The report does not make or makes a very poor attempt to relate the project with ethical and social responsibility.

Mark: 4.9 – 0

How to Extend Recommendations to Incorporate Sustainability Principles

(PLO 4.2)

10 points

The report clearly and completely provides suggestions for how to extend the project recommendations to incorporate sustainability principles.

Mark: 10 – 8.5

The report competently provides suggestions for how to extend the project recommendations to incorporate sustainability principles.

Mark: 8.4 – 7.5

The report offers some suggestions for how the project can be extended to incorporate sustainability principles.

Mark: 7.4 – 6.5

An attempt is made to extend the project recommendations to incorporate sustainability principles.

Mark: 6.4 – 5.0

The report does not make or makes a very poor attempt to extend the project recommendations to incorporate sustainability principles.

Mark: 4.9 – 0

How to Extend Recommendations to Incorporate Diversity and Indigenous Perspectives

(PLO 4.3)

10 points

The report clearly and completely provides suggestions for how to extend the project recommendations to incorporate culturally diverse and Indigenous perspectives.

Mark: 10 – 8.5

The report competently provides suggestions for how to extend the project recommendations to incorporate culturally diverse and Indigenous perspectives.

Mark: 8.4 – 7.5

The report offers some suggestions for how the project can be extended to incorporate culturally diverse and Indigenous perspectives.

Mark: 7.4 – 6.5

An attempt is made to extend the project recommendations to incorporate culturally diverse and Indigenous perspectives.

Mark: 6.4 – 5.0

The report does not make or makes a very poor attempt to extend the project recommendations to incorporate culturally diverse and Indigenous perspectives.

Mark: 4.9 – 0

Professionalism

10 points

Page limit guidelines are observed. The report is logically structured and makes excellent use of the page limit. Material is fully referenced using UTS Harvard style. There are no technical errors. The report was submitted in the correct format.

Mark: 20 – 17

Page limit guidelines are observed. The report is adequately structured and makes good use of the page limit. Material is referenced using UTS Harvard style. There are very few technical errors. The report was submitted in the correct format.

Mark: 16.9 – 15

Page limit guidelines are observed. The report is structured and uses the page limit relatively well. The majority of material is referenced. There are few technical errors. The report was submitted in the correct format.

Mark: 14.9 – 13

Page limit guidelines are observed. The report is structured. Some material is referenced. There are some technical errors. The report was submitted in the correct format.

Mark: 12.9 – 10

Page limit guidelines are not observed. The report is not logically structured and does not make adequate use of the page limit. Material is not referenced. There are many technical errors. The report was not submitted in the correct format.

Mark: 9.9 – 0