Posted: September 13th, 2017

Business Research Topic- Marketing

Business Research Topic- Marketing

BRP: Second Attempt Assessment Details
Referral matrix
? You will need to identify your circumstances in the matrix:
? The rows of the matrix show the reasons why you may have been referred.
? You need to identify which row applies to your situation and check what you will need to submit, by looking at the columns.
? “Non-submission? means you did not submit the work (it was not marked).
The matrix only refers to cases where the BRP mark overall is 39% or less – and the unit has been failed.
Column 1
Column 2
Submit a
Reflective Report
Re-submit the Final Report with a Summary of Changes
Row 1
Failed the Final Report
…but passed the Initial Proposal.
?
Required.
(Weighting = 100%)
Row 2
Passed the Final Report…
…but failed overall (due to non-submission or failure of the Initial Proposal)
?
Required.
(Weighting = 100%)
Row 3**
Failed the Final Report…
…and non-submission or failure of the Initial Proposal.
?
Required.
(Weighting = 30%)
?
Required.
(Weighting = 70%)
**Row 3: Please submit one document which includes everything you have been asked to submit.
U22512 (Marketing); U22513 (HRM/OS); U22514 (Strategy) Business Research Project
3
U22512 (Marketing); U22513 (HRM/OS); U22514 (Strategy) Business Research Project
4
Submitting your work: A checklist
The Front Sheet can be found in APPENDIX 3.
Please include this when submitting your work.
**Row 3 of the matrix: If Row 3 applies to you, then you have been asked to complete more than one piece of work. Please submit one document which includes everything you have been asked to do.
Deadline ? Each piece of work must be submitted by the deadline date: 24th July 2015
Number of Copies
? Two printed (“hard”) copies and one electronic copy of the work on a CDROM or USB in Word (not pdf) format. So, 3 in total.
Presentation and Layout:
? Please state the title of your work, your degree title, your student number, and the word count on the front page of your work.
? Ensure your student number is on all pages – including the front page (the header/ footer tool is useful for this).
? Please include a contents page.
? You can also include a short Acknowledgements section if you wish.
? Word count: State the word count on the front page. Please do not exceed the word count (the word count includes everything except: your Contents Page, Acknowledgements, Bibliography and Appendix).
? Marks will be deducted if you exceed the word count.
? Do not include your name on any page of your work.
? The text should be in 12 point font size (font “Arial”) with 1.5 line spacing and margins of about 1″ should be allowed on all sides of the paper.
? It is suggested that you print your work double sided: this helps save paper.
? It is important to ensure that layout and presentation (heading, page numbers, font, tables, etc.) is consistent and clear throughout the work.
Referencing and Bibliography:
? Your work must include a correctly formatted bibliography.
? You will need to ensure that all your work is referenced appropriately using Harvard APA – failure to do this will result in loss of marks.
? Guidelines on the Harvard APA referencing system can be found on the library website.
Review of scholarship:
? It is recommended that all students put their final drafts through Turnitin in order to ensure that written work does not fall foul of charges of plagiarism or poor scholarship. Assistance is provided by the e-team with regards to this process.
? It is recommended that the report produced by the Turnitin process be discussed with your supervisor (if you have concerns) and (the front page – showing the % match) included in your Appendix.
? Please note: Plagiarism is a serious offence. You will need to submit an electronic copy of your work, and tutors reserve the right to run these electronic copies through Turnitin to help identify Plagiarism.
? Further details can be found on the Moodle page for the BRP.
U22512 (Marketing); U22513 (HRM/OS); U22514 (Strategy) Business Research Project
5
Appendix 1: Reflective Report (Column 1)
A 600 word reflective statement:
? Providing justification of why your question in your Final Report is worth exploring. Provide justification that this is a useful area to explore – referencing a range of sources to help support your reasoning.
? Explaining why it would be useful to explore knowledge on your question further, and who (e.g. in industry / within organisations) would benefit from “knowing? more about this topic.
Criteria
Excellent (70%+)
Utilises sources very effectively and puts forward a well reasoned and analytical justification. Synthesizes sources and convincingly addresses why further exploration of the topic may be useful and worthwhile.
Good
(60-69%)
As Excellent – generally strong, but lacks detail, few sources/references, and leaves.
Some insight into usefulness, and relevance of questions – but lacks links, analysis and originality.
Pass
(40-59%)
Attempt made, generally weak and provides very little evidence of reading or justification in the work.
Fail (=39%)
No justification included within the work.
Your mark will also depend on how well you have done the following:
? Clearly justified and made clear why the question is worth exploring further.
? Placed some emphasis on the usefulness/importance/interest to industry/organisations/policy makers.
? Addressed why the chosen area may be topical and why it is worth exploring in more detail; why/how more knowledge and a deeper analysis of academic research evidence would be of interest/useful.
? Included: Some links to academic (research evidence) and non-academic (media reports, political statements, quotes from industry, consultancy reports etc.) sources on the chosen topic area.
? Included: Some insight into what might be the potential impact of knowing more and understanding better, the topic which you propose to explore in the Final Report.
Style
For high marks:
? Overall use of English excellent; structure and coherence of work also excellent.
? Presentation: clear, consistent, and easy to follow.
? Academic writing style excellent. Outstanding quality in terms of organisation, structure, use and flow of language, grammar, spelling, format, presentation, diagrams, tables, referencing etc.
U22512 (Marketing); U22513 (HRM/OS); U22514 (Strategy) Business Research Project
6
Appendix 2. The Final Report (Column 2)
Section A (70%)
? Critical Review of Academic Research Evidence (55%)
? Conclusions (35%)
? Style (10%)
Section B (30%)
? Usefulness, potential implications and impact (50%)
? Research recommendations (20%)
? Reflection (20%)
? Style (10%)
SECTION A
Critical Review of Academic Research Evidence Excellent (70+) Good (60-69) Pass (40-59) Fail (=39) Excellent in all areas. Convincing and consistently high level demonstrated throughout. High level of critique and analysis of sources. Very good in most/all areas listed below. Analytical rather than descriptive. Attempts all aspects of assignment. Overall, very good. Higher marks – satisfactory effort in most areas listed below. Some analysis, but lacks depth. Lower marks – adequate effort overall, descriptive approach. Little analysis of sources. Little or no attempt. Less than adequate – may lack logic and structure; failed to address many areas. Almost completely descriptive. Very weak in almost all areas listed below. Very little, or no critique. Excellent work: – Comprehensive and thorough critical literature review; uses extensive range of journal papers. – Demonstrates a high level of critical analysis and detailed discussion of the literature; and develops strong analytical arguments within the work. Identifies and discusses different perspectives and themes within the literature. – Demonstrates a detailed understanding of the topic, considers the strength of evidence; methodological issues (e.g. bias, reliability, research approach, validity, generalisability) in the literature. Considers and uses the research findings in the literature well. – Summarises, synthesises, links together, compares and draws conclusions from a range of (journal paper) sources. – Critical approach, expresses own voice when discussing both what is known and not known. – Student has ensured the opinions, claims, statements, assertions and arguments they make, are the result of careful consideration and analysis of the evidence in the academic sources. Clearly explained and structured. – Shows originality and confidence in analysing and criticising assumptions, is aware of the limits of knowledge. – Links work very well to the question and sub questions. Addresses the questions convincingly via an analysis of academic research evidence. – Questions and discusses the extent to which their analysis of academic knowledge helps address the question(s) – strong, convincing, and logical work. – Extensive range of academic research literature used – i.e. journal articles. References accurately throughout (Harvard APA).
U22512 (Marketing); U22513 (HRM/OS); U22514 (Strategy) Business Research Project
7
Conclusions Excellent (70+) Good (60-69) Pass (40-59) Fail (=39) Excellent in all areas. Convincing and consistent throughout. Conclusions flow logically; are very well argued and addresses all questions. Avoids making illogical claims. Very well reasoned throughout. Very good in most/all areas listed below. Analytical rather than descriptive. Most of the work flows well from the review. Logical approach. Some good reasoning. Some areas very strong. Overall, very good. Higher marks – satisfactory effort in most areas listed below. Some analysis, but lacks depth. In some areas, unconvincing and does not logically flow from work. Lower marks – adequate effort overall, descriptive approach. In many areas, unconvincing and lacks logic, flow and reasoning. Little or no attempt. Less than adequate – lacks logic and failed to address many areas. Almost completely descriptive. Very weak in almost all areas listed below. Very little, or no critique.
Excellent work:
– Strong, clear and convincing throughout.
– Makes intelligent and original links to the question. Draws original conclusions and takes a careful analytical and critical approach when making claims and assertions.
– Refers to all the questions (including sub questions) and structures the work clearly.
– Conclusions flow logically from the previous section (the ‘critical review of academic research evidence’).
– Provides a convincing, well reasoned and logical explanation of how academic knowledge helps address the question(s).
– Should include references to the literature where appropriate, to support conclusions. References accurately throughout (Harvard APA).
Style
Your mark will also depend on the following:
Overview:
? For high marks, this will provide a clear introduction, will be well structured, relevant and will clearly state the question and sub questions.
Overall Style: For high marks:
? Overall use of English will be very good.
? The work will be clear, well structured, and well-organised.
? Referenced accurately (Harvard APA) throughout
? High attention to presentation and consistent throughout (i.e. organisation, structure, use and flow of language, grammar, spelling, format, presentation, diagrams, tables, word count stated, etc).
? The work should be written in 3rd person.
? Marks will be deducted if the overall word count is exceeded (word count excludes Contents page, Acknowledgements, Bibliography and Appendix).
U22512 (Marketing); U22513 (HRM/OS); U22514 (Strategy) Business Research Project
8
SECTION B
Usefulness, potential implications and impact Excellent (70+) Good (60-69) Pass (40-59) Fail (=39)
Excellent in all areas.
Convincing and consistent throughout.
Flow logically from Part A; very well argued and refers to all questions.
Avoids making illogical claims. Very well reasoned throughout.
Shows excellent understanding of the topic (from academic and industry perspectives).
As Excellent, but lacks the thoroughness and detailed approach.
Very good in most/all areas listed below.
Analytical rather than descriptive.
Most of the work flows well from Part A. Some good reasoning.
Some areas very strong. Overall, very good.
Higher marks – satisfactory effort in most areas listed below. Lacks depth in a number of places. In some areas, unconvincing and does not logically flow from Part A.
Lower marks – adequate effort overall, descriptive approach. In many areas, unconvincing and lacks logic, flow and reasoning. Shows limited understanding of the topic (from academic and industry perspectives).
Little or no attempt. Less than adequate – lacks logic and failed to address many areas. Almost completely descriptive. Very weak in almost all areas listed below. Very little, or no critique.
Excellent work:
– Evaluates the usefulness of what has been found (i.e. referring to the critical review in Section A) to the ‘business world’ (e.g. industry/organisations/businesses/employees/policy makers).
– Makes original links and provides evidence of both a thorough knowledge of academic evidence and industry issues/perspectives on the topic. A range of academic / non-academic sources will be referenced references (using Harvard APA) to support statements.
– Addresses the implications of the work and how what has been discovered might have an impact.
– Thorough, thoughtful and critical approach.
Research recommendations Excellent (70+) Good (60-69) Pass (40-59) Fail (=39)
Recommends and justifies, what researchers could do (i.e. future research topics/methods/research design) to address any knowledge gaps identified, explore issues further, and to provide industry/ organisations/ employees, with the knowledge argued to be missing or unclear.
As Excellent, but recommendations may be weaker or require some more explanation and/or justification. Not as convincing and relies less on earlier analysis of literature.
Attempts to make some recommendations – but has limited knowledge of topic and issues (from academic and industry perspectives).
Little or no attempt. Descriptive. Very little, or no critique.
Excellent work:
– References (using Harvard APA) areas of literature that could be developed.
U22512 (Marketing); U22513 (HRM/OS); U22514 (Strategy) Business Research Project
9
Reflection (Writing in 1st person here is acceptable in this section only) Excellent (70+) Good (60-69) Pass (40-59) Fail (=39)
– Detailed analysis of what the student feels has been learnt from doing this project; skills which have been developed.
– Comments thoughtfully on how the project has affected employability. Clear, and analytical.
– Overall, good.
– Some analysis lacks depth and consideration and does not refer to a wide range of different aspects of the project.
– Attempt at reflection, limited, descriptive, lacks analysis and provides little depth or insight.
– Little or no attempt. Descriptive. Very little, or no critique.
Style
Your mark will also depend on the following:
For high marks:
? Overall use of English will be very good.
? The work will be clear, well structured, and well-organised.
? Referenced accurately (Harvard APA) throughout
? High attention to presentation and consistent throughout (i.e. organisation, structure, use and flow of language, grammar, spelling, format, presentation, diagrams, tables, word count stated, etc).
? The work should be written in 3rd person (it is acceptable to write only the ‘Reflection’ in 1st person language).
? Marks will be deducted if the overall word count is exceeded (word count excludes Contents page, Acknowledgements, Bibliography and Appendix).
Appendix 3: Front Page to include when submitting your work
This will need to be printed out, completed, and included when you submit your work (please see page 10).
U22512 (Marketing); U22513 (HRM/OS); U22514 (Strategy) Business Research Project
10