Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
You should include a completed copy of this Assignment Cover. Any submission without
this completed Assignment Cover sheet will be considered invalid and not marked.
Please copy the table below and include it as your cover sheet on 1st page of the submission. The sheet
should be before the cover/title page of your submission.
Programme
MSc Management
Module name
Schedule Term
Dec 2014
Mitigating Circumstances:
I have read the published guidance available on the student intranet (VLE- Academic Registry) outlining
BPPs Mitigating Circumstances policy and I confirm I am not aware of any medical or other mitigating
circumstances that may have impaired my completion and/or submission of this assessment.
Student Reference Number: xxxxxx
Date: xx/xx/xxxx
Date: xx/xx/xxxx
By submitting this coursework you agree to all rules and regulations of BPP regarding
assessments and awards for programmes.
BPP Business School
1
MSc Management
You are required to submit your assessment via Turnitin online access. Only submissions made via the specified
th
mode will be accepted and hard copies or any other digital form of submissions (like via email or pen drive etc.)
will not be accepted. When you submit your work onto Turnitin you MUST use your SRN as the name of your
report
For coursework, the submission word limit is 2,500 words, excluding references and appendices. You must
comply with the word count guidelines. Tables, diagrams and headings are NOT included within word count
calculations. You must specify total word count on the front page of your report
For coursework, please use font size 11 for body text and the typeface (font) should be Arial or Calibri with 1.5
spacing. For headers and titles, please use font size 14. Your submission must have standard margins and page
numbers.
Do not put your name or contact details anywhere on your submission. You should only put your student
identification number (SRN) which will ensure your submission is recognised in the marking process.
A total of 100 marks are available for this module assessment and you are required to achieve minimum 50% to
pass this module.
You are required to use only Harvard Referencing System in your submission. Any content which is already
published by other author(s) and is not referenced will be considered as a case of plagiarism.
You can find further information on Harvard Referencing in the online library on the VLE. You can use the following
link to access this information:
https://bpp.blackboard.com/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_90_1
The University College has a very strict policy regarding plagiarism and in proven instances of plagiarism or
collusion, severe punishment will be imposed on offenders. You are advised to read the rules and regulations
regarding plagiarism and collusion in the GAR and MOPP which are available on VLE in the Academic registry
section.
Extensions: In accordance with BPP General Academic Regulations, any course work handed in late without good
cause will receive a zero (0) grade. Course work submitted for assessment, without prior approval, after the
stated deadline will be accepted within the first five days following the deadline, but shall be penalised by having
five per cent of the total available marks for the assignment deducted for each 24 hour period (or part thereof)
following the deadline.
Students who are unable to hand work in on time for valid reasons may be given approval for the late submission
of assessed course work in accordance with the Extension of Deadline Date for Assessments Procedure (published
online, in the assessment manual and student programme handbook. It is recommended students meet with
their module leader and/or Director of Programmes to discuss this course of action.
Student brief:
You are a marketing consultant and have been hired by an organisation of your choice to carry out
an analysis of their business and to make marketing recommendations to address the challenges
you have identified. (The organisation you chose should be large enough to enable you to carry out
the depth of analysis required but not so large that you are not able to provide the level of depth
and detail expected. If you choose a large organisation you are advised to concentrate on a
specific product range and country).
Executive summary (max 500 words and not included within word count)
Marketing Report
Marketing analysis
Strategic Recommendations
Appendix:
o
Bibliography
Appendices
Marking Guide
Assignment Part
Mark
PESTEL (3 marks)
25%
Does the audit show evidence of research and the ability to gather
information from different sources? (3 marks)
40%
Does the student compare and contrast those different viewpoints and
not just explain them? (10 marks)
Are they based on the outcomes from the previous analysis i.e. is there
25%
Are they the result of thinking that shows synthesis skills? (5 marks)
Structure (2 marks)
Grade Descriptors:
The Grade Descriptors below are used by examiners as part of the marking process, comprising evaluation,
application, concept and presentation. The weightings of these elements are used to inform grades within a
level and differentiate between levels. To maximise marks, candidates need to consider the weighting of
the four elements at the relevant level
Criteria
Knowledge
&
Understandi
ng
(a)
Systematic
Understandin
g
(b) Emerging
Thought
Argument
(a) Analysis,
Synthesis &
Evaluation
(b) Numerical
Analysis
(c)
Argumentatio
n
(d)
Independent
Research
Distinction
Merit
Pass
Fail
Fail
70-+%
60-69%
50-59%
40-49%
0-39%
(a) Evidence of a
systematic
understanding,
which may contain
some gaps, of all
major - and some
minor - issues,
concepts, theories
and research
(a) Evidence of an
understanding of an
appropriate range of
issues, concepts,
theories and
research but has
significant gaps or
misunderstandings.
(a) Evidence of a
limited
understanding of
issues, concepts,
theories and
research either
major and/or minor.
(b) Unclear or
imprecise
understanding of
thoughts and
practices at the
forefront of the
discipline.
(a) Consistently
precise, accurate
and reasoned
analysis, synthesis
and/or evaluation
addressing all
issues, some with
creativity
(a) Precision,
accuracy and clear
reasoning
throughout the
analysis, synthesis
and/or evaluation
addressing all
issues appropriately
(a) A lack of
precision, accuracy
or reasoning in
analysis, synthesis
or evaluation with
significant gaps in
the issues
addressed
(c) Evidence of an
argument that is
generally convincing
with a good internal
consistency and
addresses most
issues. Very good
use of information
gathered to support
the argument.
(c) Evidence of an
overall convincing
argument but may
have weaknesses,
gaps or
inconsistencies.
Clear use of
information
gathered but may
have some
weaknesses in the
integration into the
argument.
(c) Evidence of a
consistent argument
but may have
weaknesses,
significant gaps or
be unconvincing.
Clear use of
information
gathered but may
not be sufficient to
sustain the
argument.
(c) Lack of
consistency or
structure in the
argument. Serious
weaknesses in the
integration of
evidence and/or no
awareness of the
limitations or
weaknesses of the
research.
Criteria
(Continued)
Argument
(continued)
(d)
Independent
Research
Presentation
(a) Structure
(b)
Referencing
(c) Use of
Language
Distinction
Merit
Pass
Fail
Fail
70+%
60-69%
50-59%
40-49%
0-39%
(d) Substantial
research and
evidence of an
innovative use of a
wide range of
personal research
with clear and
consistent critical
evaluation both
conceptually and
methodologically
(d) Evidence of a
range of personal
research but
evidence of
methodological or
conceptual
evaluation may be
limited, inconsistent
or inappropriate
(a) Excellent
structure and
presentation
(a) Adequate
structure and
presentation
(a) Adequate
structure and
presentation
(b) Competent
references and
notes but may
contain
inconsistencies,
errors or omissions
(c) Generally
understandable use
of language but
significant errors in
expression affecting
overall clarity