0% Plagiarism Guaranteed & Custom Written

PGBM156 – Strategic Management in an International Context 2020/1

Individual Assessment

Case Study: Bringing External Innovation inside – Evidence from Multinational Corporations (MNCs)

Word Count: 3,000 words maximum

Introduction:

This individual assignment will be assessed by means of a 3,000 maximum wordreport. The assignment has been designed to allow you to develop and useyour knowledge and skills in understanding key strategic issues relating to any Global I ndustry you arefamiliar with. You will be required to apply the strategic concepts and analytical techniques studied in this module. All the learning outcomes below will be assessed

Demonstrate critical understanding and application of relevant strategic management and leadership principles that support organisational values and impact on organisational direction.
Understand the holistic nature of strategy and the relationship bet ween strategic management and leadership and apply analytical techniques to solve complex problems in real life organizations.
Demonstrate knowledge of the strategic decision making process through critical analysis of how strategic decision making enables an organisation to relate to changes in its international business environment.
Critically evaluate and monitor the business mission, vision, objectives and policies of international organisations.
Use critical reflective skills to reflect on the impact of their understanding on the strategic problem solving process.

The assignment will be internally moderated by: Module Team/John Dixon‐ Dawson Please note:

1. Allwork m ustadhere to the University regulations on‘ Cheating, Collusion and Plagiari sm’

which are provi ded as an A ppendix in y our Programm e Handbook . You are encouraged to use ‘Harvard Referencing Style’ andavoid ‘Plagiarism’.

2. Students are required to submit their coursework through JIRA. Only assessments submitted throug h JIRA will be marked. Any other submi ssion i ncludi ng submission to your study centre in hardcopy will be treatedas a non‐submission.

A copy of y our T urniti n© originality report, generated via Canvas, m ust be submi tted in conjunction withyour assignment.

Task

Your task is to carry out a critical analysis and evaluation of the strategies adopted by Multinational Corporations ( MNCs) operati ng in an i ndustry and country of your choice, using information available to thepublic e.g. companyannualreports in pdf andothermaterials researched. You wi ll be ex pec ted to select and apply appropriate theori es, techniques and models studied duringthe module whilst having regardto the practicalaspects of strategy development.

Yo ur a ssig nment should be presented in a business repo rt fo rma t a nd sho uld be 3 ,00 0 wo rds ma ximum (ex cluding ex ecutive summa ry/a bstra ct, references and releva nt a ppendices). The report should include a title pa ge a nd a bstra ct a nd be fully a nd co nsistently referenced, using Ha rv ar d Refer enci ng style. Yo u must submit an electro nic versio n of the repo rt Online via the University’s A ssig nment Spa ce ‐ this sho uld be clearly labelled with your name, your course and the name of the case study.

It is recommendedthat youresearch information to support your arguments. This may be obtained from a diverse range of sources andyou are encouragedto research theissues in whichever way you deem appropriate.

Assessment Criteria

In the event of failing this individual assignment, normal referral / deferral procedures will apply. This assignment carri es a weighting of 100%. The assessment will foc us on the level of ANALYSI S carri ed out. T hat i s, the applicati on of THEORETICAL CONCEPTS studi ed in the module to the ‘practical’ case study presented. In other words, y ou should proceed beyond a DESCRIPTI ON of the com pany and i ts acti ons. Y ou should be analysi ng ‘w hy’ rather then desc ribi ng ‘w hat’. T he assignment willbe assessedandmoderated by twomembers of staff inaccordance with the marks allocated to each of the questions detailed below. Demonstrate critical understanding and application of relevant strategic management and leadership principles that support organisational values and impact on organisational direction.

Academic Rigour

your ability to isolate the key strategic issues
the coherence and depth of the analysis of those issues
the ability to analyse the strategy context within which companies operates
the ability to critically review and evaluate strategic decisions made by companies Methodology
the use of relevant evidence, from material provided and personal research to support any statements made
the appropriateness of the methods used and theoretical models and frameworks applied
the breadth and depth of research undertaken
the ability to make sound recommendations or conclusions arising from the analysis
the soundness of arguments put forward Presentation
the summary of arguments
report layout and format
use of illustrative material and evidence to support arguments
the appropriateness of length
the quantity and accuracy of referencing

Evaluation of data

Open innovation is about combining internal and external resources and acting on the opportunities this creates. More and more MNCs prove this to be a strong value proposition and cannot afford to lose out on the opportunities created by this combination. Open innovation has the ability to create long term advantages in management or organizational innovation rather than just product or service innovation. Once a MNC gets ahead of its competitors and becomes the preferred partner of choice within its industry, this often turns out to be a longer term advantage. It is hard for competitors to copy and thus neutralize the benefits that open innovation leadership can bring

Read the Annual R eports of a MNC operating in an industry and country of your choice; and carry out appropriate analy ses of the global corporate strategi es adopted by the MNC and its closest competitors, in response to the questions below. You are encouraged to use relevant data/information from company websites.

Briefly distinguish between ‘Open’ and ‘Closed’ Innovation. Using information from the most recent Annual Report of the MNC of your choice, critica lly evalua te the impact of ‘factor endow m ent’ , ‘related and supporting industries’, ‘demand conditions’, ‘strategy, structure, and rivalry’, ‘government’, and ‘chance’ on the MNC’s approach to external innovation and competition.

[30 % marks]

Critically a ssess the merits a nd demerits of meeting the ‘dema nd fo r interna tionalisatio n’ a nd the ‘demand fo r lo calisa tio n’ simulta neo usly. Which of these two dema nds wo uld yo u reco mmend tha t yo ur cho sen M NC sho uld a do pt in o rder to max imise its co rpo ra te pro fita bility thro ug h lo w‐co st lea dership or pro duct differentiation or focus – give two key reasons for your choice.

[30 % marks ]

Using yo ur understa nding of ‘o rg a nisa tio na l purpo se’, ‘co rpo ra te pro fita bility’ a nd ‘co rpora te so cia l respo nsibility’, critica lly eva lua te the a bility of the C E O a nd Senio r ma nag ement tea m in yo ur cho sen M NC’s to simulta neo usly a chieve co rpo ra te profita bility a nd co rpo ra te so cial respo nsibility o bjectives crucial for the MNC’s survival and growth.

Yo u a re expected to demonstra te critical understa nding a nd a pplica tio n of relevant stra teg ic management and leadership principles that suppo rt organisa tiona l values and impact on organisa tio nal directio n.

[30 % marks]

In250‐300 words reflect on the impact ofthis assessmenton your understanding oftheMultinational co rpo ra tio ns (M NC s) o pera ting in an industry and co untry of yo ur cho ice, inserting reflectio ns on crisis management, suggesting how to plan prior to a rapid unexpected event such as coronavirus, and hig hlig hting the k ey benefits a nd limita tio ns of crisis ma nag ement, in crea ting a culture fo r sustaining corporate profitability. [10 % marks]

Assessment Regulations

Fo r further informa tio n rega rding A ssessment Reg ula tio ns, ex tenua ting circumsta nces or ex tensio ns a nd a ca demic integ rity, plea se refer to yo ur Prog ra mme Ha ndbo ok on the University of Sunderland in Lo ndo n information page on Canvas.

Reading List Suggested Reading:

De Wit, B. (2017) – Strategy: An International Perspective, 6th Edition, London: Cengage Learning.

De Wit, B. and Meyer, R. (2014) Strategy Process, Content, and Context International Perspective, 5th Edition, London: Cengage Learning.

Johnson, G., Scholes, K. and Whittington, R. (2005) Exploring Corporate Strategy: Text and Cases, 7^th Edition, London: Financial Times Prentice Hall.

Lasserre, P. (2018) Global Strategic Management , 4^th Edition, London: Palgra ve McMilla n. Lynch, R.(2006) Corporate Strategy, Fourth Edition, Financial Times Prentice Hall.

Lynch, R. (2018) Strategic Management, 8^th Edition, London: Pearson.

Mintzberg, H., Ahlstrand, B. and Lampel, J. (1998) Strategy Safari, London: Financial Times Prentice Hall Mintzberg, H., Ahlstra nd, B. and Lampel, J. B. (2008) Strategy Safari: The complete guide through the

wilds of strategic management, 2^nd Edition, London: Financial Times Prentice Hall

Websites & PDF documents: https://hbr.org/ Harvard Business Revie

https:// www.m ckinsey.co m McKinsey Consultancy. www.economist.com The Economist

www.ft.com The Financial Times

Generic Assessment Criteria

Please refer to the PGBM156 module guide on Canvas.

Please access your reading list from the library website. To access it, please go to https://moduleresources.sunderland.ac. uk/ andsearchfor yourmodule.

Submission guidelines

Yo ur submissio n link s will beco me a va ila ble a pprox ima tely 4 week s prio r to yo ur submissio n dea dline, along with detailed instructions on how to submit your assignment.

Grading

Yo u will be ma rk ed in a cco rdance to the University of Sunderla nd a ss ess m ent cr iter ia a tta ch ed belo w. The a ssessment criteria co vers; Releva nce, Kno wledg e, A na lysis, A rg ument a nd Structure, C ritica l Evaluation, Presentation, Reference to Literature.

Assessment Criteria

PGBM156 – Strategic Management in an International Context 2020/1

Categories

Grade

Relevance

Knowledge

Analysis

Argument and Structure

CriticalEvaluation

Presentation

Reference to Litera ture

86 –

100%

The wo rk ex a mined is ex empla ry a nd pro vides clea r evidence of a co mplete g ra sp of the k no wledg e, understa nding a nd skills a ppro pria te to the L evel o f the qua lifica tion. There is a lso unequivocal evidence sho wing tha t a ll the lea rning outco mes a nd respo nsibilities a ppro pria te to tha t Level a re fully sa tisfied. At this level it is ex pected tha t the wo rk will be exempla ry in all the ca tego ries cited a bo ve. It will demo nstra te a pa rticula rly co mpelling eva lua tio n, originality, and elegance of argument, interpretation or discourse.

76‐85%

The work examined is excellent and demo nstra tes comprehensive knowledg e, understa nding and skills appropria te to the Level of the qualifica tio n. There

is also excellent evidence showing that all the learning outco mes and responsibilities appro pria te to that level are fully satisfied. At this level it is expected that the work will be excellent in the majority of the catego ries cited above or by demons tra ting particula rly compelling evaluatio n and elegance of argument, interpretation or discourse and some evidence of originality

70 – 75%

The wo rk exa mined is of a hig h sta nda rd a nd there is evidence of co mprehensive kno wledg e, understa nding a nd sk ills a ppro pria te to the L evel of the

qualificatio n. There is clea rly a rticula ted evidence demo nstra ting tha t a ll the lea rning o utco mes and respo nsibilities a ppropria te to that level a re sa tisfied At this levelit is expected that the standard of the work will be high in the majority of the categories cited above or bydemonstrating particularly compelling evaluation and elegance of argument, interpretation or discourse.

60 – 69%

Directly releva ntto

A substantial

Comprehensive

Well supported,

Contains distinctive

Well written, with

Critical appraisalo f

the requirements of theassessment

knowledge of relevantmaterial, showing a clear grasp of themes, questions and

issuestherein

analysis – clear and orderly presentation

focussed argument which is clear and logically structured.

or independent thinking; and begins to formulate an independent

positio n inrela tio n

to theory and/or

standa rd spelling and gramma r, in a readable stylewith acceptable format

up‐to‐date and/or appropriate literature.

Recognition of different

perspectives. Very

practice.

good useofawide range of sophisticated source material.

PGBM156 – Strategic Management in an International Context 2020/1

50 – 59%	Some attempt to address the	Adequate knowledge of afair	Significant analytical	Genera lly co herent and logically	May contain some distinctive or	Competently written, with only	Uses a good variety of litera ture which
	requirem ents of the assessment: may drift away from this in less focused passages	range of relevant material, with intermittent evidence of an apprecia tion of its significance	treatment which has a clear purpo se	structured, using an appropriate mode of argument and/or theoretical mode(s)	independent thinking; may begin toformulate an independent positio n inrela tio n to theory and/or practice.	minor lapses from standard grammar, with acceptable format	includes recent texts and/or appropriate literature, including a substantive amount beyond
							library texts.
							Competent use of source materia l.
40 – 49%	Some correlation	Basic understanding	Some analytical	Some attempt to	Sound workwhich	A simple basic style	Evidence of use of
	with the	of the subject but	treatment, but may	construct a	expresses a	but with significant	appropriate
	requirem ents of the assessment but there are instances of irrelevance	addressing a limited range of material	be prone to description, or to narrative, which lacks clear	coherent argument, butmay suffer loss of focus and consistency, with	coherent position only in broad terms and in uncritical conformity to one	deficiencies in expression or format that may pose obstacles for	literature which goes beyond that referred to by the tutor. Frequently
			analytica lpurpo se	issues at stake stated only vaguely, or theoretical mode(s) couched in	or more standard views of thetopic	the reader	only uses a single source to suppo rt a point.
				simplisticterms
35 – 39%	Relevance tothe requirem ents of the assessment may be very	A limited understa nding ofa narrow range of material	Largelydescriptive or narrative, with little evidenc e of analysis	A basic argument is evident, but mainlysuppo rted by assertion and	Some evidence of a viewstarting tobe formed but mainlyderiva tive.	Numerous deficiencies in expression and presenta tion; the	Ba rely a dequa te use of literature. Over relianceo n

	intermit tent, and may be reducedto its vaguest and	there may be a lack of clarityand coherence	writer mayachiev e clarity (if at all) only by using a simplistic	materia l provided by the tutor.
	least challenging terms		or repetitio us style
	The evidenc e provided shows that the majority of the learning outco m es and respo nsibilities appropria te to that Level are satisfied – for compensa tion consideration
30 – 34%	The wo rk exa mined pro vides insufficient evidence of the kno wledg e, understa nding and skills a ppropria te to the Level of the qualifica tio n. The evidence
	provided shows that someof the learningoutcomes and responsibilities appropriate to thatLevelaresatisfied. The work willbe weakinsome of theindicators.
15‐29%	The work examined is unacceptable and provides little evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Levelof the qualifica tio n. The evidence sho ws tha t few of the lea rning o utco mes a nd respo nsibilities a ppro pria te to tha t L evel a re sa tisfied. The wo rk will be weak in several of the indicators.
0‐14%	The work examined is unacceptable and provides almost no evidence of the knowledge, understanding and skills appropriate to the Levelof the
	qualifica tio n. The evidence fails to sho w tha t a ny of the lea rning outco mes a nd respo nsibilities a ppro pria te to tha t L evel a re sa tisfied. The wo rk will be weak in the majority or all of the indicators.

PGBM156–StrategicManagementinanInternationalContext 2020/1

Individual Assessment

CaseStudy:BringingExternalInnovationinside–Evidence from Multinational Corporations(MNCs)

Word Count: 3,000 words maximum

Introduction:

Thisindividual assignmentwill beassessedbymeansofa3,000maximumwordreport.The assignmenthasbeendesignedtoallowyoutodevelopanduseyourknowledgeandskills in understandingkeystrategicissuesrelatingto anyGlobalIndustryyouarefamiliarwith.Youwill berequiredtoapplythestrategicconceptsandanalyticaltechniquesstudied inthismodule.All thelearningoutcomesbelowwillbeassessed:

1. Demonstrate critical understanding and application of relevant strategic management and leadership principles that support organisational values and impact on organisational direction.

2. Understand the holistic nature of strategy and the relationship bet ween strategic management and leadership and apply analytical techniques to solve complex problems in real lifeorganizations.

3. Demonstrate knowledge of the strategic decision making process through critical analysis of how strategic decision making enables an organisation to relate to changes in its international businessenvironment.

4. Critically evaluate and monitor the business mission, vision, objectives and policies of internationalorganisations.

5. Use critical reflective skills to reflect on the impact of their understanding on the strategic problem solvingprocess.

Theassignmentwillbeinternallymoderatedby:ModuleTeam/JohnDixon‐Dawson Pleasenote:

1. Allworkmustadheretothe Universityregulationson‘Cheating,Collusion andPlagiarism’

whichareprovidedasanAppendixinyourProgrammeHandbook.Youareencouraged touse‘HarvardReferencingStyle’andavoid‘Plagiarism’.

2. Students are required to submit their coursework through JIRA. Only assessments submittedthroughJIRAwillbemarked.Anyothersubmissionincludingsubmissionto yourstudycentreinhardcopywillbetreatedasanon‐submission.

AcopyofyourTurnitin©originalityreport,generatedviaCanvas,mustbesubmittedin conjunction withyourassignment.

Task

Your task is to carry out a critical analysis and evaluation of the strategies adopted by MultinationalCorporations(MNCs)operatinginanindustryandcountryofyourchoice,using information available to thepublic e.g. companyannualreports in pdf andothermaterials researched.Youwillbeexpectedtoselectandapplyappropriatetheories,techniquesand modelsstudiedduringthemodulewhilsthavingregardtothepracticalaspectsofstrategy development.

Yourassignmentshouldbepresentedinabusinessreportformatandshouldbe3,000wordsmaximum (excludingexecutivesummary/abstract,referencesandrelevantappendices).Thereportshouldinclude atitlepageandabstractandbefullyandconsistentlyreferenced,usingHarvardReferencingstyle.You mustsubmitanelectronicversionofthereportOnlineviatheUniversity’sAssignmentSpace‐thisshould be clearly labelled with your name, your course and the name of the casestudy.

Itisrecommendedthatyouresearchinformationtosupportyourarguments.Thismaybe obtainedfromadiverserange ofsources andyouareencouragedtoresearchtheissuesin whicheverwayyoudeemappropriate.

Assessment Criteria

Academic Rigour

• yourabilitytoisolatethekeystrategicissues

• the coherence and depth of the analysis of thoseissues

• theabilitytoanalysethestrategycontextwithinwhichcompaniesoperates

• theabilitytocriticallyreviewandevaluatestrategicdecisionsmadebycompaniesMethodology

• the use of relevant evidence, from material provided and personal research to supportany statementsmade

• theappropriatenessofthemethodsusedandtheoreticalmodelsandframeworksapplied

• the breadth and depth of researchundertaken

Evaluation of data

• theabilitytomakesoundrecommendationsorconclusionsarisingfromtheanalysis

• the soundness of arguments put forwardPresentation

• the summary ofarguments

• report layout andformat

• useofillustrativematerialandevidencetosupportarguments

• the appropriateness of length

• the quantity and accuracy ofreferencing

ReadtheAnnualReportsofaMNCoperatinginanindustryandcountryofyourchoice;andcarry outappropriateanalysesoftheglobalcorporatestrategiesadoptedbytheMNCanditsclosest competitors, in response to the questions below. You are encouraged to use relevant data/information from companywebsites.

‘related and supporting industries’, ‘demand conditions’, ‘strategy, structure, and rivalry’, ‘government’, and ‘chance’ on the MNC’s approach to external innovation and competition.

[30 % marks]

Criticallyassessthemeritsanddemeritsofmeetingthe‘demandforinternationalisation’andthe‘demand forlocalisation’simultaneously.Whichofthesetwodemandswouldyourecommendthatyourchosen MNCshouldadoptinordertomaximiseitscorporateprofitabilitythroughlow‐costleadershiporproduct differentiationorfocus–givetwokeyreasonsforyourchoice.

[30 % marks ]

Using yourunderstandingof‘organisationalpurpose’,‘corporateprofitability’and‘corporate social responsibility’,criticallyevaluatetheabilityoftheCEOandSeniormanagementteaminyourchosen MNC’stosimultaneouslyachievecorporateprofitabilityandcorporatesocialresponsibilityobjectives crucial for the MNC’s survival andgrowth.

Youareexpectedtodemonstratecriticalunderstandingandapplicationofrelevantstrategicmanagement andleadership principlesthatsupport organisationalvaluesandimpact onorganisationaldirection.

[30 % marks]

[10 % marks]

Assessment Regulations

ForfurtherinformationregardingAssessmentRegulations,extenuatingcircumstancesorextensionsand academicintegrity,pleaserefertoyourProgrammeHandbookontheUniversityofSunderlandinLondon information page onCanvas.

Reading List Suggested Reading:

De Wit, B. (2017) – Strategy: An International Perspective, 6th Edition, London: Cengage Learning.

De Wit, B. and Meyer, R. (2014) Strategy Process, Content, and Context International Perspective, 5th Edition, London: Cengage Learning.

Johnson, G., Scholes, K. and Whittington, R. (2005) Exploring Corporate Strategy: Text and Cases, 7^th Edition, London: Financial Times Prentice Hall.

Lasserre,P.(2018)GlobalStrategicManagement,4^thEdition,London:PalgraveMcMillan. Lynch, R.(2006) CorporateStrategy, Fourth Edition, Financial Times Prentice Hall.

Lynch, R. (2018) Strategic Management, 8^th Edition, London: Pearson.

wilds of strategic management, 2^nd Edition, London: Financial Times Prentice Hall

Websites & PDF documents: https://hbr.org/Harvard Business Review

https:// www.mckinsey.co m McKinsey Consultancy. www.economist.com The Economist

www.ft.com The Financial Times

Generic AssessmentCriteria

Please refer to the PGBM156 module guide on Canvas.

Please access your reading list from the library website. To access it, please go to https://moduleresources.sunderland.ac. uk/andsearchfor yourmodule.

Submission guidelines

Yoursubmissionlinkswillbecomeavailableapproximately4weekspriortoyoursubmissiondeadline, along with detailed instructions on how to submit yourassignment.

Grading

YouwillbemarkedinaccordancetotheUniversityofSunderlandassessmentcriteriaattachedbelow. Theassessmentcriteriacovers;Relevance,Knowledge,Analysis,ArgumentandStructure,Critical Evaluation, Presentation, Reference toLiterature.

Assessment Criteria

10 | P a ge

100% Plagiarism Free & Custom Written,
Tailored to your instructions

Our Giveaways

Plagiarism Report

for £20 Free

Formatting

for £12 Free

Title page

for £10 Free

Bibliography

for £18 Free

Outline

for £9 Free

Limitless Amendments

for £14 Free

Get all these features for
£83.00 FREE

ORDER NOW

Still Not Convinced?

View our samples written by our professional writers to let you comprehend how your work is going to look like. We have categorised this into 3 categories with a few different subject domains

View Our Samples

	intermit tent, and may be reducedto its vaguest and	there may be a lack of clarityand coherence	writer mayachiev e clarity (if at all)only by using asimplistic	material provided by thetutor.
	least challenging terms		or repetitio us style
	TheevidenceprovidedshowsthatthemajorityofthelearningoutcomesandresponsibilitiesappropriatetothatLevelaresatisfied–forcompensation consideration
30 – 34%	Theworkexaminedprovidesinsufficientevidenceoftheknowledge,understandingandskillsappropriatetotheLevelofthequalification.Theevidence
	providedshowsthatsomeofthelearningoutcomesandresponsibilitiesappropriatetothatLevelaresatisfied.Theworkwillbeweakinsomeof theindicators.
15‐29%	Theworkexaminedisunacceptableandprovideslittleevidenceoftheknowledge,understandingandskillsappropriatetotheLevelofthe qualification.TheevidenceshowsthatfewofthelearningoutcomesandresponsibilitiesappropriatetothatLevelaresatisfied.Theworkwillbe weak in several of theindicators.
0‐14%	Theworkexaminedisunacceptableandprovidesalmostnoevidenceoftheknowledge,understandingandskillsappropriatetotheLevelofthe
	qualification.TheevidencefailstoshowthatanyofthelearningoutcomesandresponsibilitiesappropriatetothatLevelaresatisfied.Theworkwillbe weak in the majority or all of theindicators.

PGBM156 – Strategic Management in an International Context

Introduction:

The assignment will be internally moderated by: Module Team/John Dixon‐ Dawson Please note:

1. Allwork m ustadhere to the University regulations on‘ Cheating, Collusion and Plagiari sm’

2. Students are required to submit their coursework through JIRA. Only assessments submitted throug h JIRA will be marked. Any other submi ssion i ncludi ng submission to your study centre in hardcopy will be treatedas a non‐submission.

It is recommendedthat youresearch information to support your arguments. This may be obtained from a diverse range of sources andyou are encouragedto research theissues in whichever way you deem appropriate.

Academic Rigour

Evaluation of data

[30 % marks]

[30 % marks ]

Reading List Suggested Reading:

Generic Assessment Criteria

Submission guidelines

Grading

Assessment Criteria

Introduction:

Theassignmentwillbeinternallymoderatedby:ModuleTeam/JohnDixon‐Dawson Pleasenote:

1. Allworkmustadheretothe Universityregulationson‘Cheating,Collusion andPlagiarism’

2. Students are required to submit their coursework through JIRA. Only assessments submittedthroughJIRAwillbemarked.Anyothersubmissionincludingsubmissionto yourstudycentreinhardcopywillbetreatedasanon‐submission.

Itisrecommendedthatyouresearchinformationtosupportyourarguments.Thismaybe obtainedfromadiverserange ofsources andyouareencouragedtoresearchtheissuesin whicheverwayyoudeemappropriate.

Academic Rigour

Evaluation of data

[30 % marks]

[30 % marks ]

[10 % marks]

Reading List Suggested Reading:

Generic AssessmentCriteria

Submission guidelines

Grading

Assessment Criteria

10 | P a ge

Our Giveaways

Still Not Convinced?

Recent Uploads

Unit 18: Innovation and Improvement through Action Rese

With reference to typical activities and behaviours, ap

Critically evaluate own work-based experiences of busin