Assignment Paper

Component number Form of assessment Assessment size Weighting (%) Learning outcomes assessed Core or Non-Core
1 Individual Case Study Analysis 2000 words 70 LO3, LO4, LO5, LO6, LO7 and LO8 Core

Referencing: In the main body of your submission, you must give credit to authors on whose research your work is based. Append to your submission a reference list that indicates the books, articles, etc. that you have read or quoted to complete this assignment (e.g. for books: surname of author and initials, year of publication, the title of book, edition, publisher: place of publication).
Disclosure:
Please include the following statement on the title page of the submitted assignment, followed by your name:

I declare that this assignment is all my work and that I have acknowledged all materials used from the published or unpublished works of other people. All references have been duly cited.

Turnitin: All assignments must be submitted to Turnitin unless otherwise instructed by the Lecturer.

Note: the Turnitin version is the primary submission and acts as a receipt for the student.

Late submission of the electronic version of the assignment will result in a late penalty mark. Penalties for late submission: Up to three days late, a maximum mark of 40%. Over three days late, Refer.

Only the Extenuating Circumstances Panel may grant an extension. YES x
NO

Learning outcomes assessed: LO3: Negotiate, influence, and agree roles and rewards within founder teams in entrepreneurial and business settings, doing so in a legitimate ethical manner.
LO4: Appropriately plan and solve problems in entrepreneurial and innovative settings.
LO5: Deploy effective networking and persuasive communication skills
LO6: Work independently and as part of a collaborative virtual team to develop attributes and capabilities for business success in a complex and changing environment.
LO7: Undertake independent research to inform practice within specific areas of specialism.
LO8: Critically evaluate and reflect on individual career development objectives.

 

TASK DESCRIPTION – Individual Case Study Analysis (70%)

TASKS

The article “You need an innovation strategy” by Pisano (2015), concluded that innovation strategies must evolve.

a) TASK A – Based on the available article and evidence from other relevant literature on this topic, critically assess the validity of this statement, and draw your conclusion.
– 500 words

This task addresses LO4 and LO7

b) TASK B – Within an entrepreneurial and innovative settings, discuss how founder teams can negotiate, strategise and influence to solve problems in an ethical manner for the business to success in a complex and changing environment.
– 800 words

This task addresses LO3, LO4 and LO6

c) TASK C – Drawing from this article, critically evaluate the importance of effective networking and persuasive communication skills. Additionally, reflect on individual career development objectives.
– 500 words

This task addresses LO5 and LO8

This Individual Case Study Analysis addresses LO3, LO4, LO5, LO6, LO7 and LO8.
LENGTH REQUIRED

2000 words +/- 10%. Any deviation from this will be penalised.

 

FORMATTING AND LAYOUT

Please note the following when completing your written assignment:
1. Writing: Written in English in an appropriate business/academic style
2. Focus: Focus only on the tasks set in the assignment.
3. Formatting: Typed in Times New Roman or Arial font 12 with at least 1.5-centimeter space at each edge, double spaced, and pages numbered.
4. Document format: Case Study Format – Please ensure that you acknowledge your sources of data using the Harvard referencing method.
5. Ensure a clear title, course, and name or ID number is on a cover sheet, and a bibliography using Harvard referencing throughout is also provided.
6. Research: Research should use reliable and relevant sources of information e.g. academic books and journals that have been peer-reviewed. The research should be extensive. In-text citations along with reference lists and Bibliography are compulsory.

The use of a range of information sources is expected – academic books, peer-reviewed journal articles, professional articles, press releases and newspaper articles, reliable statistics, company annual reports, and other company information. All referencing should be Harvard style.
.
This Individual Case Study Analysis addresses LO3, LO4, LO5, LO6, LO7 and LO8.

Structure of the assignment
1. Title Page
2. Executive Summary
3. Table of Contents
4. Introduction (100 words)
5. Body
– Part A – (500 words)
– Part B – (800 words)
– Part C – (500 words)
6. Conclusion (100 words)
7. List of References
8. Bibliography 
MARKING CRITERIA AND STUDENT FEEDBACK

This section details the assessment criteria. The extent to which these are demonstrated by you determines your mark. The marks available for each criterion are shown. Lecturers use a similar format to comment on the achievement of the task(s), including those areas in which you have performed well and areas that would benefit from development/improvement.
Common Assessment Criteria Applied Marks available Marks
Awarded
1. Research-informed Literature
The extent of research and/or own reading, selection of credible sources, application of appropriate referencing conventions. 20
You must give credit to authors on whose research and/or publications your report is based. Append to your submission a reference list that indicates the books, articles, etc you have read or quoted to complete this assignment (e.g. for books: the surname of author and initials, year of publication, the title of books, edition, publisher, and place of publication.

2. Knowledge and Understanding of Subject
The extent of knowledge and understanding of concepts and underlying principles associated with the discipline. 25
Show good knowledge and understanding of Sustainable Organizations. Critically analyse how companies can become more innovative and discuss the roles and responsibilities of sustainable strategic managers. Demonstrate knowledge on effective networking and persuasive communication skills.

3. Analysis
Analysis, evaluation, and synthesis; logic, argument, and judgment; analytical reflection; organisation of ideas and evidence 25
Analyse the aims, concept, and role of management to build a sustainable organisation in your case study analysis complete with good logic, sound argument, judgment innovative ideas, and evidence on which your arguments are based.

4. Practical Application and Deployment
Deployment of methods, materials, tools, and techniques; application of concepts; formulation of innovative and creative solutions to solve problems. 20
Indicate the various methods, tools, and techniques employed in your report and show how the application of theories and concepts enhances innovative and creative solutions towards problem-solving.

5. Skills for Professional Practice
Attributes in professional practice: individual and collaborative working; deployment of appropriate media; presentation and organisation. 10
Deployment of the appropriate media, presentation, and other tools.
Report structure
TOTAL 100

LEVEL 6
COMMON ASSESSMENT AND MARKING CRITERIA

Level 6
In accordance with the Framework for Higher Education Qualifications, at the end of Level 6 students should have coherent and detailed knowledge and a systematic understanding of their subject area, at least some of which is informed by the latest research and/or advanced scholarship within the discipline. They will be able to accurately deploy established techniques of analysis and enquiry within a discipline, using their conceptual understanding to devise and sustain arguments and/or to solve problems. They should be aware of the uncertainty, ambiguity and limits of knowledge. They should be able to critically evaluate evidence, arguments, assumptions, abstract concepts and data (that may be incomplete), to make judgements, and to frame appropriate questions to achieve a solution – or identify a range of solutions. They will apply the methods and techniques that they have learned to review, consolidate, extend and apply their knowledge and understanding, and to initiate and carry out projects. They will have the ability to manage their own learning, and to make use of scholarly reviews and primary sources (for example, refereed research articles and/or original materials appropriate to the discipline). They will demonstrate the qualities and transferable skills necessary for employment requiring: the exercise of initiative and personal responsibility; decision-making in complex and unpredictable contexts; the learning ability needed to undertake appropriate further training of a professional or equivalent nature.

Level 6 FAIL MARGINAL FAIL SATISFACTORY
(3rd / Pass) GOOD
(2.2 / Pass) VERY GOOD
(2.1 / Merit) EXCELLENT
(1st / Distinction) EXCEPTIONAL
(1st / Distinction)
Category 0-29% 30-39% 40-49% 50-59% 60-69% 70-84% 85-100%
Engagement with literature (including reading, referencing,
academic conventions and
academic honesty) Little or no evidence of reading and/or reliance on inappropriate sources.
Views and findings mostly unsupported and non-authoritative.
Referencing conventions used incoherently or largely absent. Poor engagement with essential reading. No evidence of wider reading. Reliance on inappropriate sources, and/or indiscriminate use of sources. Heavily reliant on information gained through class contact. Inconsistent and weak use of referencing. Engagement with a limited range of mostly relevant and credible sources. Some omissions and minor errors.
Referencing conventions evident though not always applied accurately or consistently. Engagement with an appropriate range of research-informed literature, including sources retrieved independently. Some over-reliance on texts. Referencing may show minor inaccuracies or inconsistencies. Engagement with a wide range of research-informed literature, including sources retrieved independently.
Selection of relevant and credible sources. Very good use of referencing, with no/very few inaccuracies or inconsistencies. Engagement with an extensive range of relevant and credible literature, informed by the latest research. Consistently accurate application of referencing. Exceptional engagement with an extensive range of relevant and credible literature, informed by the latest research. High-level referencing skills consistently and professionally applied.
Knowledge and understanding (Coherent and detailed knowledge and systematic understanding of the subject area, at least some of which is informed by the latest research and/or advanced scholarship within the discipline.)
Major gaps in knowledge and systematic understanding of the subject matter. Substantial inaccuracies. No awareness of knowledge of the latest research and/or advanced scholarship within the discipline.
Gaps in knowledge, with only superficial systematic understanding. Some significant inaccuracies and/or irrelevant material. No awareness of knowledge of the latest research and/or advanced scholarship within the discipline. Limited knowledge and systematic understanding of the relevant concepts and principles within the subject area which to some limited extent, is informed by current research and scholarship. Knowledge is reasonably detailed, accurate with a good systematic understanding of the field of study and to some extent, current research and scholarship. Knowledge is reasonably extensive coherent and detailed. Exhibits very good understanding of the breadth and depth of established views, and the work is, at least in part, well-informed by current research and scholarship. Excellent coherent and detailed knowledge and systematic understanding of the principles and theories of current research and scholarship. Clear awareness of challenges to established views and the limitations of the knowledge base. Exceptionally coherent and detailed knowledge and systematic understanding of the principles and theories of the subject, well-informed by current research and scholarship. A critical, sophisticated and nuanced awareness of the ambiguities and limitations of knowledge.
Cognitive and intellectual skills
(Conceptual and critical thinking, analysis, synthesis and evaluation of research, assumptions, abstract concepts and data (that may be incomplete); logic, argument and judgement.) Wholly or almost wholly descriptive work. Little or no analysis, synthesis or evaluation.
Failure to develop arguments, leading to illogical or invalid judgements. Unsubstantiated generalisations, made without use of any credible evidence.
Largely descriptive work, with superficial use of critical evaluation. Weak development of arguments and judgements. Information accepted uncritically, uses generalised statements made with scant evidence and unsubstantiated opinions. Ideas sometimes illogical and contradictory. Limited attempt at critical thinking, analysis, synthesis and evaluation, tending towards description.
Some evidence to support emerging arguments and judgements but these may be underdeveloped or with a little inconsistency / mis-interpretation.
Asserts rather than argues a case.
Some critical thinking, analysis, synthesis and evaluation. Can analyse new and/or abstract concepts and data without guidance.
An emerging awareness of different stances and ability to use evidence (that may be incomplete) to support the argument.
Mostly valid arguments and logical judgements. Some tendency to assert/state opinion rather than argue on the basis of reason and evidence. Sound critical thinking, analysis, synthesis and evaluation demonstrating critical thinking. Ability to devise and sustain persuasive arguments, and to review the reliability, validity and significance of evidence (that may be incomplete) to make mostly appropriate and valid judgements.
Excellent critical thinking, analysis, synthesis and evaluation. Ability to investigate contradictory or incomplete information and make strong, persuasive, arguments and sophisticated judgements. Some evidence of independent thought and ability to ‘see beyond the question’, suggesting a grasp of the broader field and wider concepts.
Exceptional critical thinking, analysis, synthesis and evaluation based on judiciously selected evidence.
Ability to investigate contradictory or incomplete information and make strong, persuasive, arguments and sophisticated, nuanced, judgements. Evidence of independent thought and ability to ‘see beyond the question’, suggesting an outstanding grasp of the broader field and wider concepts.
Practical skills
(Apply/deploy accurately established tools and techniques; initiate and carry out projects; formulate solutions to solve problems in complex and unpredictable contexts.) Limited or no use of methods, materials, tools and/or techniques.
Little or no appreciation of the context of the application.
Limited understanding of the application of theory to practice or making appropriate links between the two.
Very weak problem-solving skills in complex and unpredictable contexts. Rudimentary application of methods, materials, tools and/or techniques but without consideration and competence. Flawed appreciation of the context of the application.
Weak understanding of the application of theory to practice, with only occasional evidence of making appropriate links between the two. Weak problem-solving skills in complex and unpredictable contexts.

An adequate awareness and mostly appropriate application of well-established methods, materials, tools and/or techniques.
Basic appreciation of the context of the application. Theoretical knowledge and understanding applied in practice, but not always making logical links between the two.
Can identify problems and propose basic solutions in complex and unpredictable contexts without fully appreciating the complexity. A good and appropriate application of standard methods, materials, tools and/or techniques.
Clear appreciation of the context of the application. Mainly consistent, accurate and logical application of theory to practice, making appropriate links between the two
Can identify problems and propose mostly appropriate solutions in complex and unpredictable contexts. A very good application of a range of methods, materials, tools and/or techniques.
Very good consideration of the context of the application, with perceptive insights. Can identify problems and propose appropriate solutions in complex and unpredictable contexts.
Evidence of some innovation and creativity. An advanced application of a range of methods, materials, tools and/or techniques.
The context of the application is well considered, and insightful.
Application and deployment extend beyond established conventions. Can identify complex problems and propose excellent solutions. Innovation and creativity evident. Exceptional levels of application and deployment skills in unpredictable, practical contexts, drawing skilfully on the latest research within the discipline. Can identify complex problems and propose sophisticated solutions. Assimilation and development of cutting edge processes and techniques.
Transferable skills for life and professional practice
(Exercise of initiative and personal responsibility; professional development; initiate and complete tasks and procedures: individually and/or collaboratively; use appropriate media to communicate effectively; fluency of expression; clarity and effectiveness in presentation and organisation.) Communication medium is inappropriate or misapplied.
Work is poorly structured, disorganised and/or confusingly expressed. Very weak use of language and/or very inappropriate style. Little or no evidence of autonomy (or collaboration, where relevant) in the completion of tasks. Little or no evidence of the skills required in graduate employment.

Communication medium is poorly designed and/or not suitable for the audience.
Work is poorly presented in a disjointed manner. It is loosely, and at times incoherently, structured, with information and ideas often poorly expressed. Weak use of language and/or inappropriate style. Weak independent initiative (or collaboration, if relevant). Limited evidence of the skills required in graduate employment. Can communicate in a suitable medium but with some room for improvement.
Mostly ordered presentation and structure in which relevant ideas / concepts are reasonably expressed. Work may lack coherence in places. Can work as part of a team, but with limited involvement in group activities.
Demonstrates the basic skills required in graduate employment, with some areas of minor weakness. Can communicate effectively in a suitable format, but may have minor errors.
Mostly coherent, organised work, in a suitable structure and is for the most part clearly expressed. Can work effectively independently and/or as part of a team, with clear contribution to group activities.
Demonstrates the skills required in graduate employment, with some areas of strength and some of minor weakness. Can communicate well, confidently and consistently in a suitable format.
Work is coherent, fluent, well-structured and organised. Can work very well autonomously and/or as part of a team, with very good contribution to group activities.
Demonstrates very good graduate employment skills, with just occasional minor weakness. Can communicate professionally confidently and consistently in a suitable format.
Work is coherent, very fluent and is presented professionally. Can work autonomously with initiative. Where relevant can work professionally within a team, showing leadership skills as appropriate, managing conflict and meeting obligations. Demonstrates excellent graduate employment skills and an appetite for further development. Can communicate with an exceptionally high level of professionalism.
Work is exceptionally coherent, very fluent and is presented professionally. Can work exceptionally well and professionally within a team, showing advanced leadership skills. Demonstrates exceptional graduate employment skills and an appetite for further development.