Business Management Dissertation

What am I required to do in this assignment?

You should complete and submit the final dissertation to the relevant submission link via Assessment & Feedback on BREO by the deadline.

Note: Turnitin will be used for all submissions to check for plagiarism. We also reserve the right to initiate a viva voce examination if we have concerns regarding the originality of your submission. Dates of the Viva will be provided during the

induction week. You need to be available for such an event following the submission of your dissertation.

• Your f inal assessment will be an individual managerial dissertation which will be a considered and comprehensive

response to your research objectives agreed with your supervisor.

• Your dissertation will encapsulate your approach to the research, the research methods that you have deployed, an analysis of the knowledge generated as part of the investigative process and a ref lection on your personal development

as a consequence of this research p roject experience.

Submission Deadline Marks and Feedback

Before 10am on:

Click or tap to enter a date.

20 working days after deadline (L4, 5 and 7)

15 working days after deadline (L6) 10 working days after deadline (block delivery)

Click or tap to enter a date.

Unit title & code MBA Managerial Project; APO017-6

Assignment number and title 2 Dissertation

Assessment type Individual Written Report

Weighting of assessment 80%

Size or length of assessment 10000 words (+/- 10%)

Unit learning outcomes 1 Demonstrate the f ollowing knowledge and understanding

• Demonstrate a systematic understanding and critical appreciation of the interrelationship of diverse theories in the MBA toolkit to challenge existing preconceptions and develop positive and enquiring approaches to global management and enterprise. Demonstrate an aptitude and ability to solve a def ined

business problem through enquiry having drawn upon your MBA studies and

appreciating the interrelated nature of organisations.

2 Demonstrate the f ollowing skills and abilities

Demonstrate intelligent practice by imaginative and critical integration of theory and practice to create a tangible deliverable through critical insightf ul evaluation stipulating areas of excellence and ref lecting on areas f or development to improve

perf ormance in contemporary organisations.

2

• It will need to demonstrate your understanding of the topic area in the context of contemporary academic theory, models and debate. Your dissertation will comprise a number of integrative elements all of which will contribute to the

achievement of the learning outcomes f or this unit.

• You will receive supervision and guidance through the process by regular communication and f eedback on your progress

by the tutor.

• Please see the “Guided Learning” section of the BREO unit site f or detailed guidelines f or writing each section of a

dissertation.

• The main assessment and marking criteria are listed at the end of this assignment brief .

What do I need to do to pass? (Threshold Expectations from UIF) In order to PASS Assessment 2, you will need to:

• Demonstrate critical assessment of theories underpinning the aim and objectives of the project and integrate this

understanding into a coherent f ramework f or analysing case studies or other data/evidence.

• Develop a research design to identif y and assemble sources of data and evidence and carry our data analysis as

appropriate to achieve the aim and objectives.

• Demonstrate critical analysis and evaluation of case studies/evidence, debate the implications of the analysis and

develop a tangible deliverable.

How do I produce high quality work that merits a good grade?

We will be filling this section in together in class on Click or tap to enter a date. make sure you have downloaded/printed out the

Assignment Brief and bring it to the session with you.

We suggest that you avoid writing in the f irst person (“I”); rather the third person is recommended (e.g. it can theref ore be suggested

that...). You may include headings and subtitles and a contents page if you f eel this will help you to stay f ocused and create clearer sign - posting f or the reader.

Guide to writing the Project Report

Section / Title Details / Guidance

Title page Title of your report.

Executive

Summary

Concise summary of your report, including aim, analysis, key conclusions and recommendations

(comes f irst, written last)

Contents Page Include page numbers.

Introduction Introduction to the report setting out what the aims and objectives of the report are, the context, what the report will cover, why and your method of analysis. Must be supported by the ideas of

inf luential contributors using in text citations.

Methodology Justif y the choice of your research methodology (e.g. primary or secondary) f or data collection

and analysis and design the approaches that best f it your research project. Consider any ethical issues considered and explain clearly your sources of inf ormation

Literature Review You will need to draw on a wide range of recent (2008-2018) quality academic sources, including

peer-reviewed material, combined with practical examples to support your arguments. You will

need to critically evaluate the sources in relation to the application of theory to practice.

Analysis You need to state and justif y the method of analysis as appropriate to the aim and objectives of your project. If using systematic literature review you will need to present f ull details of the

3

Literature: Use academic source, i.e. books, journal articles etc. Ref er to respected industry sources DO NOT overuse the Internet, do not

use and / or quote from Wikipedia. Reminder:

You are required to use proper in-text ref erence and the ref erence list in the end using the Harvard Referencing System.

The writing: Try to approach this assignment in a logical and systematic way. Make sure you have a logical structure, a convincing argument, clear description of the situations which ‘set the scene’, and clear explanation which relate to theories, and a conclusion that draws your argument together.

search(es) with number of results and inclusion/exclusion criteria resulting in the f inal sample of

evidence f or review.

You need to present the evidence (data) published in quality academic sources. You need to

analyse in-depth the evidence (data) and present the f indings clearly.

For systematic review and comparative analysis methods a table is usef ul to illustrate the

f indings.

Word count f or this section will depend on the topic of your project and may vary widely between

projects

Discussion In the discussion, you will need to interpret your f indings with ref erence to theories introduced in

the literature review. Apply the theory to the data, critically analyse and evaluate in -depth the

ef f ectiveness of theory in applied in practice. What is the unique insight f rom your research?

Conclusions This section should initially answer the report aim and objectives and draw together the main points f rom your analysis. It summarises what has been learned f rom undertaking this project concerning the application of theory into practice. What are the main conclusions f rom your

project? No new inf ormation should be presented in the conclusions.

Recommendations Make recommendations f or improvement based upon your conclusions, clearly stating how they

can add value. Recommendations should be f ully f easible and justif ied considering costs, priority level, timescale, resources, who is responsible, benef its and any f urther implications. Proposals

should be actionable (‘immediately implementable’) not just a list of ideas.

Ref erence List A list of all sources cited directly in the text using Harvard ref erencing style

Ref erences/Bibliography – NOT OPTIONAL

The ref erences/bibliography should comprise a variety of sources used in the text, most of

which should be academic journal articles. Other sources could include books, trade

publications, news articles, industry reports, company websites etc.

Harvard ref erencing style is expected

How does assignment relate to what we are doing in scheduled sessions?

The first sessions will provide an insight into the tools that can be used to develop a proposal. Further help will be provided by

local tutors during workshops to develop a bespoken approach.

4

How will my assignment be marked?

Your assignment will be marked according to the threshold expectations and the criteria on the following page .

You can use them to evaluate your own work and consider your grade before you submit.

Criteria Pass Good Pass Commendation Distinction

Introduction

Weight 10%

40 to 49 %

A rea sonable

introduction with objectives mentioned,

but not clea rly stated a nd

not put in context.

50 to 59 %

A good introduction with

clea r ba ckground information a nd sta tement

of objectives which link to

resea rch questions.

60 to 69 %

A well-presented

introduction with clea r ba ckground information

a nd clea r statement of

objectives with ra tionale, linked to purpose a nd scope

of the work.

70 to 100 %

A complete a nd thorough

introduction with clea r ba ckground information

a nd sta tement of objectives

with a comprehensive a nd persua sive ra tionale.

Literature Review

Weight 25%

40 to 49 %

Evidence of a limited knowledge of the

releva nt litera ture. Some critica l a rea s a re

included.

50 to 59 %

Evidence of a satisfactory review of releva nt

litera ture, containing a ca demically sound

sources.

60 to 69 %

Evidence of a comprehensive review of

releva nt litera ture with a ra tionale. The review

contains a good variety of

a ca demically va lid sources.

70 to 100 %

Evidence of critica l eva luation of relevant

litera ture a nd a convincing ra tionale. The review

contains a rea sonably wide

va riety of a cademically va lid sources.

Research Methodology

Weight 20%

40 to 49 %

Evidence of some

understanding of the resea rch methodology

used, but la cking cla rity

a nd purpose.

50 to 59 %

Evidence of some

understanding of methodology used a nd how

a re a ppropriate to the

resea rch question.

60 to 69 %

Evidence of a sound

understanding of the possibilities a nd limita tions

of the methodology used

a nd a pply it rea sonably well for da ta collection a nd

a na lysis.

70 to 100 %

Evidence of a n a dvanced

a wa reness of the possibilities a nd limita tions

of the methodologies used

a nd a pply it soundly for robust da ta collection a nd

a na lysis.

Analysis/Discussions

of findings and conclusions

Weight 25%

40 to 49 %

Discussion is not so releva nce to the research

question. Some evidence

of a nalysis support reported findings.

50 to 59 %

Evidence of sa tisfactory a na lysis a nd judgement.

Rea sonable a rguments

ba sed on a firm foundation from the question through

to the conclusions constructed.

60 to 69 %

Evidence of sound a nalysis a nd judgement. Persuasive

a rguments based on a firm

foundation from the question through to the

conclusions constructed.

70 to 100 %

Evidence of robust a nalysis a nd judgement. Precise a nd

persua sive arguments

ba sed on a firm foundation from the question through

to the conclusions constructed

Coherence

Weight 10%

40 to 49 %

Evidence of

prepa redness to state a position on a n issue but

with a limited use of

supporting evidence.

50 to 59 %

Evidence of a bility to sta te,

on the ba sis of evidence a personal position on a n

issue, a selection of

a ppropria te materia l with a

60 to 69 %

Evidence of a bility to sta te

a nd defend on the basis of evidence a personal position

on a n issue. Clea r evidence

of a selection of a ppropriate

70 to 100 %

As for commendation with

a n a dditional fla ir a nd ima gina tion. Cogent and

clea r sta tements reflecting

5

Where a n a rgument is

not presented in a coherent or critica l form.

logica l structure a nd

coherent argument.

ma terial with a logica l

structure a nd coherent a rgument, which displa y

high levels of critica lity.

findings a nd a statement of

future direction.

Structure, format,

language and

referencing

Weight 10%

40 to 49 %

Rea sonable structure,

a ca demically sound la ngua ge a nd formatting,

a nd rea sonable referencing.

50 to 59 %

Rea sonably well-structured

a nd proofread report, linking to the question

through to da ta collection to findings. Good use of

references.

60 to 69 %

Well-structured and

proofread report which is

linked to the research

question and findings.

Appropriate use of

references.

70 to 100 %

Very well-structured report

which is strongly linked to

the research question and

findings. Very well

presented supporting

references.

3rd Class – 40-49% Lower 2nd – 50-59% Upper 2nd – 60-69% 1st Class – 70%+