2000 word essay

The organisation of business Description of essay assignment (2019)

For this assignment you will be preparing a research proposal that is 2,000 words including references and that meets all of the requirements specified in this assignment description. The proposal must fall within the area of knowledge covered in the module, it must identify a research topic and it must position this in relation to relevant academic literature, to be drawn only from the list of academic journals provided. Below you will find a detailed description of the purpose of the assignment, some advice on what a research proposal is, details about the format your proposal should take and information on how your assignment will be assessed.

Purpose of the assignment

The purpose of this assignment is to provide you with an opportunity to demonstrate that you are able to synthesize your knowledge from the module to produce your own unique proposition for a study within the field of management and organisation. In developing a proposal, you will need to demonstrate that you are able to:

· Identify business as a distinct form of social action that is different from, but related to, other domains within human society and culture

· Apply core concepts and theories from management and organisation studies to analyse cases that focus on the management of people and technologies in contemporary work organisations

· Make informed and responsible judgments regarding specified organisational problems by drawing on concepts and theories from management and organisation studies

This assignment should be considered formative in the sense that it provides you with an opportunity to develop the skills required to prepare a research proposal, it provides you with an opportunity to receive developmental feedback on such a proposal and if you wish you can later use it as a starting point for preparing a dissertation proposal.

What is a research proposal?

Definition. A research proposal is a piece of writing in which you propose what research you want to do. The research proposal that you are expected to prepare for this assignment has to specifically identify: what your proposed research is going to be about; what it is trying to find out or achieve; what we already know about the topic; what we might learn if you were to conduct the research; and, why that is worth learning. It involves a considerable amount of library research.

Structure. In your seminars you learned how to construct an argument. The research proposal presents an argument. Your proposal therefore needs to contain

all the elements of an argument (see: Toulmin model), it needs to have a coherent line of reasoning, and it needs to have internal consistency. The finished product needs to be a ‘stand-alone’ document, meaning that someone who has not spoken with you should get a complete sense of what you are proposing to research without discussing the proposal with you. You should therefore think of it as an opportunity to help your reader see how you view the situation, how your ideas advance something an interested reader might want to know, what has already been studied about this topic, and why the proposed research is important and significant. It is not a “sales pitch”. Rather, it is a carefully prepared, convincing, interestingly written, and skilled presentation of a reasoned argument.

Audience. You should assume that your audience is composed of scholars who know what research is and are interested to know about your specific proposal. However, you should not assume that they know anything about your specific topic, which means you need to introduce it well. You should also assume that your audience wants to know about your topic in as much detail as possible, so you should develop your ideas.

Structure of the research proposal for this assignment

· Title. Your proposal should include a title. The title needs to summarise the main idea or ideas of your proposed study. It should contain the fewest possible words needed to adequately describe the content and purpose of your study. Keep in mind that it is the first thing anyone reads when they see your work, so it is consequential.

· Introduction. The written part of the proposal should begin with an introduction – one or two paragraphs at most – in which you present an easily accessible story or example of what your proposed research is about. This is the only section of your assignment where you get to refer to popular sources such as reputable news outlets (e.g. BBC, Financial Times, The Guardian, The Economist), legitimate websites and reports (e.g. corporations, governments or other organisations of interest) and if absolutely necessary anecdotal personal experiences. The purpose of the introduction is to get your reader interested in the topic. You could simply title it “Introduction” or you could give it a more creative title that relates to what is in this introduction.

· Relevance. The next section of your proposal provides an overview of the proposed research and it is your opportunity to show how your proposal relates to business and management (i.e. its relevance). Building on the story or example from your introduction, you first need to explain what it is that you want to study. Once you have identified what you want to study you then need to state how your chosen research topic relates to what you have learned in this module. If we were to compare the research proposal with the take-home exam, then the introduction (above) is like the case (e.g. Amazon’s new technologies) and this section is like your answer to the question (i.e. your analysis of the case using the relevant theories, concepts and key terms from

the module). This section will therefore provide the terms and grounds upon which you will then review the relevant literature in greater detail.

· Literature review. This section is the main part of your assignment. Here you draw on the most important academic journal articles that are related to your proposed research topic to provide a summary of what we already know about this topic. You must use the list of journals provided. It is where you present the library research you have done in the form of a review of the literature. The purpose of reviewing what we already know is to arrive at a point where it is clear that what we do not know is the thing you intend to research. This will take the form of a research question or a research problem. In the seminars you learned about how to formulate good research questions and problems. In other words, the whole purpose of this section is to develop the following structure: (a) “here is what we know”; (b) “therefore here is what we do not know”; (c) “therefore my research question is...”.

· Conclusion. The conclusion is the final written section of your proposal – one or two paragraphs. This is your chance to summarise your proposal in a couple of sentences and then convince your reader why studying this is necessary, interesting, important and significant. Think about the seminar on rhetoric and do your best to persuade your reader.

· References. At the end of your proposal is a list of references under the title “References” in which you include full citations for everything you have cited in-text. Since your proposal will be used to assess the quality and originality of your ideas, whether you are able to think critically and whether you have a grasp of the relevant literature, it is important that you think carefully about whether your reference list reflects this.

Some common pitfalls to avoid

· Many students often spend most of their time trying to decide on a topic and then virtually no time actually developing it. This is a major mistake. It is better to quickly choose a topic which is less than your ideal choice and develop it really well than to spend almost all your time trying to decide on a topic and then have no time to develop it.

· Make sure that your research idea, question or problem is very clearly stated and well-grounded in academic research. Think about it this way. Most of the marks for your work will be awarded not based on the idea, question or problem itself but on whether it is clear what this is and whether you have done the research you need to have done to develop it properly.

· If your proposal is poorly specified, badly structured, and filled with jargon or rambling sentences, it will not be convincing or give a clear idea of what you are proposing. You should aim to produce clearly written sentences that are not repetitive.

Formatting

Please include your student number and provide a word count under the title of your essay. Include your reference list in the word count.

Typeface

Font Font size Character spacing Margins Alignment

Line spacing

Body text Paragraph Headings

Arial or Times New Roman 12 point 100%, normal position Normal (2.5cm – all sides) Non-justified

1.5 lines 1.5 lines with one extra line 1.5 lines with one extra line

All pages should be numbered

Plagiarism statement

It is generally understood why cheating in examinations is wrong: it is an attempt to gain undeserved credit by presenting the work of another as one’s own. For the University not to treat cheating as an extremely serious offence would be unfair to its students and would jeopardise the standard of its awards. Exactly the same is true of a take-home exam submitted for assessment. Plagiarism is the equivalent of cheating in an invigilated examination because it involves the reproduction of another’s work, whether ideas, data or expressions, without due acknowledgement. This is plagiarism, whether the source is printed, electronic or handwritten, whether it is reproduced verbatim or is paraphrased, and whether it is drawn on extensively or in brief.

The University has an agreed policy setting out procedures and penalties for dealing with academic misconduct. This policy can be found on the University's portal. The policy also gives guidance on proper and adequate acknowledgement of source material, but if students are in any doubt at all about the nature of plagiarism, or the means by which to avoid it, students are strongly advised to consult their tutor. Students should clearly understand that it is their responsibility to be sure they understand these matters. Ignorance is not accepted as a defence for plagiarism.

Assessment

This is an assessed task and in order to pass the course, you must complete the task. It will count as 50% of your final mark and will be assessed using the full range

of marks. At the end of this document you will find the University of Stirling Common Marking Scheme which will be used for determining your mark. Your work will be assessed against the indicators below. The ultimate aim of the assessment will be to evaluate the answers you provide as a whole against the generalised marking criteria. The level of achievement against these generalised criteria will be determined by the extent to which the indicators below have been addressed. Since this is an assessed task which counts toward a university degree it will be assessed at a standard that would be expected from students at the University of Stirling. In particular, attention will be given to whether this is a piece of scholarly work that meets the standards of academic rigour.

Assessment indicators 1. Structure

o A 2,000-word essay, including references o Word processed according to required format o Contains a reference list at the end of the document o Reference list uses correct referencing format o Essay follows required structure

2. Style

o Claims and quotations are appropriately cited in the text o Contains logical transitions at all levels o Prose is clear and easy to understand o Sentence structure is satisfactory

3. Content

o Has a title that summarises the main idea o Begins with an introduction that introduces the topic o Contains a section that explains the relevance of the topic o Correctly links this with theories, concepts and key terms o Reviews the relevant literature

4. Argument

o Constructs a logical sequence of argumentation o Develops overall in a clear and interesting manner o Components of the argument fit together o Every paragraph supports or explains a part of the main argument

Relevant journals for this assignment

To help you limit your literature review to studies that are relevant for this module, you will find below a list of journals to which you should restrict your library research. You can either go directly to the journals via the University of Stirling library and search or browse that journal, or you can search specific journals via Google scholar’s advanced search feature and include the journal’s title in the relevant search box.

Organization Studies Organization Human Relations Work, Employment and Society Management Learning

Journal of Business Ethics Academy of Management Review Administrative Science Quarterly Organization Science Academy of Management Annals Academy of Management Journal Journal of Management Studies Academy of Management Learning and Education Gender, Work and Organization Accounting, Organizations and Society Management and Organizational History British Journal of Management Journal of Management Inquiry Culture and Organization Research in the Sociology of Organizations Strategic Organization Economy and Society Organization and Environment Journal of Organizational Ethnography Journal of Business Anthropology Marketing Theory Consumption, Markets and Culture

Common marking scheme

Mark Equivalent Grade	Result Descriptor of Attainment of Learning Outcomes
90+ 1st	Pass Meets all the requirements to attain 80 – 89 but in addition demonstrates an exceptional degree of originality and exceptional analytical, problem-solving and/or creative skills.
80-89	Meets all the requirements to attain 70 – 79 but in addition demonstrates outstanding quality evidenced by an ability to engage critically and analytically with source material, exhibits independent lines of argument, is highly original and uses an extremely wide range of relevant sources where appropriate.
70-79	Excellent range and depth of attainment of intended learning outcomes, secured by discriminating command of a comprehensive range of relevant materials and analyses, and by deployment of considered judgement relating to key issues, concepts or procedures
60-69 2:1	Pass Attainment of virtually all intended learning outcomes, clearly grounded on close familiarity with a wide range of supporting evidence, constructively utilised to reveal appreciable depth of understanding.
50-59 2:2	Pass Attainment of most of the intended learning outcomes, some more securely grasped than others, resting on a circumscribed range of evidence and displaying a variable depth of understanding.
40-49 3rd	Pass Acceptable attainment of most intended learning outcomes, displaying a qualified familiarity with a minimally sufficient range of relevant materials, and a grasp of the analytical issues and concepts which is generally reasonable, albeit insecure.
30-39 Fail – Marginal	Fail Appreciable deficiencies in the attainment of intended learning outcomes, perhaps lacking a secure basis in relevant factual or analytical dimensions.
0-29 Fail – Clear	Fail No convincing evidence of attainment of intended learning outcomes, such treatment of the subject as is in evidence being directionless and fragmentary.
X Fail	Fail Failure to comply with published module requirements

Research problems and questions

 

Research proposals

· A research proposal normally contains:

· Title

· Overview of the research

· Positioning of the research

· Research design and methodology

· References

· In this module, however, we have not learned about research design and methodology

 

· Core process: Topic --> Literature review --> Research question

 

What is a research question?

· Initially guides you

· Then sets up your research

· Should be clear and focused

· Synthesizes multiple sources to present your unique proposition for a study

· Should be something that you are interested in or care about

Avoid

· The “all-about” paper

· Questions that can be answered in a few factual statements

 

· Rethink core process: Your interests --> Topic [ --> potential research questions] --> Literature review --> Research question

 

Examples:

1. Too broad (does not define the segments of the analysis):

· Why did the duck cross the road?

· Problem: Which duck? Which road?

2. Similarly, this could be answered simplistically:

· How many ducks crossed the main road opposite the loch at the University of Stirling on Mon 11 Mar?

· Problem: One sentence answer, does not leave room for analysis

3. More precise:

· What are some of the environmental factors that occurred in the Stirling area between February and March 2019 that would cause ducks to cross the main road entering the campus?

· Requires the author to take a stand on what is significant

· Allows the author to argue to what degree the results are beneficial or detrimental

How do you formulate a good research question?

· Choose a general topic of interest

· From your personal life and knowledge

· From the news

· Conduct preliminary research on the topic

· Current periodicals and journals

· This helps determine what kinds of questions the topic generates

Consider

· Who is the audience? (academic essay)

· “How?”, “What?”, “Why?”

· Evaluate possible responses

Evaluating your working claim

• Contestable • UNDER-DEVELOPED: “Edinburgh and Glasgow have much in common,

although they are different in some ways” • Well, yeah, but who cares?

• BETTER: “Although Glasgow’s industrial past has created a more deeply troubled economic system than found in Edinburgh, it has also created greater cultural diversity that is now helping to guide the city’s economic renewal”

• Of course you could disagree with this claim; as a result it provides a much more interesting basis for discussion. An author is likely to support it (or dispute it) more passionately than the first claim.

Evaluating your working claim

• Reasonable

· While you want your claim to be contestable, you also want it to be

reasonable

· It can be radical, in the context of the dialogue on your topic, and still be reasonable if you have sufficient evidence to support it

· Readers will recognise the difference between thoughtful, critical interpretations of evidence and contortions that twist evidence around to support an unreasonable claim

Evaluating your working claim

• Specific: Broad claims are more difficult to support effectively than focused claims. Specific claims also tend to provide readers with more useful information than broad claims

· UNDER-DEVELOPED: “Scotland’s whisky producers are responding to Brexit by finding new ways to generate income”

· BETTER: “As a result of the inability of parliament to reach a decision about the terms on which the Brexit process will proceed, Scottish whisky producers are increasingly relying on diversifying their operations to generate long-term stability for their businesses”

Evaluating your working claim

• Significant: Consider the context of the module and degree for which you are writing your essay

• Is your claim adding anything meaningful to the current dialogue surrounding the topic?

• Note that as you become more familiar with the concerns of a given topic or discipline you will be able to contribute more significantly to the discussion

Evaluating your working claim

• Interpretive: Does your claim offer an interpretation of evidence or does it simply describe a situation?

• UNDER-DEVELOPED: “The Scottish government has devolved powers”

• Rather than offering an interpretation, this sentence describes an incontestable fact. While it may have truth value it is under- developed as a proposition for an essay

• BETTER: “The Scottish Parliament at Holyrood can pass laws on devolved matters. This division of power hinders the effectiveness of decision- making relating to healthcare innovation”

• These two sentences offer readers an interpretation. They propose a specific relationship between a cause (i.e. devolution) and its effects (i.e. hinders decision-making), as well the rationale behind the interpretation