BUS2004/BUS211 Assessment 2
This is an individual assessment to demonstrate your research skills when exploring key issues in the international business. Students will identify, analyse and address potential risks and opportunities when conducting international business. Report in provided format is to be submitted online. (due online through Turnitin via Moodle).
Size expected is 1300-1500 words.
Due : Friday 2nd June 2017, 17.00 AEST
1. Select a company that is currently operating, or has the potential to operate internationally.
2. From the potentially diverse product portfolio of your chosen company, select a product/service to launch into a new market.
3. Select a country that your company does not currently sell this product/service.
4. Confirm this selection with your lecturer during Week 8 Lecture time.
5. Download and use the template on Moodle in the Assessment 2 Resources Folder.
• Secondary research including but not limited to, Government reports, Industry reports, Newspaper articles, Books, and Journal articles.
• You should also use the EBSCO Databases, which you can access through the Library Moodle page.
• This report will be submitted to Turnitin.
• Plagiarism and copying information from another student or online sources will not be tolerated.
• All students MUST acknowledge the author of any research you use in your report.
• To avoid plagiarism, you will apply proper Harvard Style Referencing (ask your lecturer and/or the librarian if you do not know what this means).
• Watch this video if you are unsure what referencing means: https://youtu.be/NDgqqPvMn0U • Use the library referencing guide.
Before submission, you must ensure your work satisfies the following requirements:
• The submission MUST follow the Assessment 2 report template (from Moodle);
• The submission must be between 1300-1500 words in length;
• The assignment must be typewritten;
• It is strongly recommended that you submit after getting the submission reviewed by mytutor. • The assignment must follow the recommended referencing style. Details of the key referencing methods can be found at: www.aih.nsw.edu.au Moodle site. Appropriate referencing must be used to help avoid unintentional plagiarism. See the AIH plagiarism policy in this study guide.
For your reference, the formatting requirements are as follows:
• Structure: Use the template provided on Moodle;
• Word length: 1300-1500 words (excluding Reference List);
• Font/Font size: Times New Roman (preferred) /12, regular;
• Margin: (Left, right, top and bottom) 2.54 cm;
• Page numbers: yes;
• Line Spacing: 1.5; • Paragraph Style: Justified.
Assessment 2: Marking Guide - 30%
Category Weight 30% Above Standard Meets Standard Below Standard
Executive summary 3 marks Executive summary provides a holistic overview of the purpose, key findings, and recommendations of the report. Executive summary did not summarise all components of the report. No executive summary
Introduction 3 marks Effective introduction including overview of company and scope of report. Introduction included but does not include effective overview or scope of report. Introduction is not clear or contains irrelevant information, and/or copied from online student papers or website.
Overview of company operations 3 marks Comprehensive overview of company operations. Sufficient overview of company operations. No attempt or incorrect overview of company operations, and/or copied from online student papers or website.
6 marks The main points are coherently presented and the logic is clear and the methodology and analysis are persuasive and clearly presented. Includes insightful commentary and highlights significance. Wide use of sources to support an in-depth analysis of environmental factors.
GOVERNMENT websites. The main points are presented and the logic of the methodology and analysis is clear.
Accompanying commentary highlights significance. Lack of research to support some parts of the analysis.
Evidence of a variety of research, from CREDIBLE sources including at least one JOURNAL article, one NEWSPAPER article, and three INDUSTRY or
GOVERNMENT websites. The main points are incoherently presented or the logic is not clear or is confusing.
Accompanying commentary missing or unhelpful. Lack of research to support most parts of the analysis.
NO evidence of research, or from NON-CREDIBLE sources.
None or irrelevant discussion and/or copied from online student papers or website
SWOT 3 marks All key findings are addressed. Most key findings are addressed. No key findings are addressed in table. The classification of
The classification of findings as either a strength, weakness, opportunity or threat is logical and consistent with previous discussions. The classification of findings as either a strength, weakness, opportunity or threat is logical with previous discussions. findings as being an opportunity or threat is inconsistent with previous discussions. None or irrelevant discussion and/or copied from online student papers or website
Strategic recommendations 4 marks Recommendations are
insightful, logical, and consistent with key findings. Recommendations are consistent with key findings. Recommendations were are not present,
unclear, lack justification, or directly copied from online sources.
Referencing 4 marks Correctly formatted citations are included where appropriate, all citations are included in the reference list, all references are cited in the report and the reference list is correctly formatted. Correctly formatted citations are included where appropriate, most citations are included in the reference list, most references are cited in the report and the reference list is correctly formatted. Citations are not included, not correctly formatted, nor included in the reference list.
There is no reference list or the reference list is not correctly formatted.
spelling, and communication
skills 4 marks There are no spelling errors, punctuation or grammatical errors. Well written with clear, consistent, and relevant discussion of arguments throughout. There are some punctuation or grammatical errors. Mostly well written. Some sections are convoluted or use hyperbole.
Would benefit from editing. A high number of grammar and spelling mistakes impact the readability and clarity of arguments. Discussions are disjointed and irrelevant to the assessment focus.