ENTR601: Entrepreneurship, Semester 2, 2020
Assessment number (1):
Real Life Case Study (RLCS)– Peter Singer and his Entrepreneurial Journey
Why this assessment?
• This assessment will enable the student to deconstruct and understand the challenges that entrepreneurial start-ups facing in creating a new business in Australia.
• It will also enhance the capacity of the student to apply and adapt the core entrepreneurial theories in a reallife situation often faced by start-ups.
• The RLCS will also explore the leadership and internal and external cultural challenges, financial hurdles, team building, and organizational pathways considered by the entrepreneur in establishing his business
• The RLCS will also consider the skillset required by the entrepreneur coupled with the strategic partnerships needed to facilitate success
What are the types of employability skills that I will acquire upon completion of this assessment?
The key employable skills that this cases study enhances include
• Foster critical analysis if complex issues
• Application of core theories to justify outcomes
• Clarification of key leadership attributes in creating a start-up
• Identification of the variables required in establishing a start-up
• Effective written skills in constructing a report-based document
• Creative and lateral problem solving
• Application of academic rigor when applied to a real time/non-academic
world pragmatic application
• Development of real time and in-depth research questioning and protocols
Purpose, as written in the EUO
Due date: Sunday 30th August 11:59pm
Length and/or format: 1,500 words - report
Learning outcomes assessed LO1 LO2 LO3
Graduate attributes assessed GA2 GA3 GA4 GA5 GA6
How to submit: Via LEO assignment activity
Return of assignment: Grades and comments will be provided through LEO
Assessment criteria: Rubric: see end of document
All too often case study inquiry is based on a static predefined set of scaffold that in many ways represent a solidified and in some cases disconnected set of parameters, the purpose of this RLCS is to bring the theoretical leaning and academic inquiry into the corporate world by interviewing a successful entrepreneur Mr Peter Singer (See below for a brief synopsis of Peter’s background). The RLCS will enable students to test their learning outcomes and theoretical insights against the reality of establishing a business. The changing environmental factors (COVID-19) and other influences (TriStar being a family business, and Bond National being a sole trader) will offer a panoply of pragmatic scenario’s that will not only contextualise the nature of the subject but create an environment of real time inquiry, insightful questioning and agile planning. The RLCS will highlight that although there are clearly articulated pathways and theoretical foundations upon which entrepreneurial success is based it ultimately comes down to the entrepreneur themselves to apply those scaffolds in creating their own successful reality. As Robert McNamara, the former United States Secretary of Defence stated, every plan suffers from the fog (things you do not know) and friction (things that you do know that do not go smoothly) of war and as such when analysing and questioning Peter these maxims will become ever so apparent.
Peter’s professional background includes:
• Building and selling a national, professional services group - TriStar;
• Creating a national service in workplace dispute handling – Working Matters;
• Transitioning a fuel company’s culture through a refined strategy - Caltex;
• Establishing a commercial and workplace mediation service – Bond National; (https://bondnational.com.au/)
Peter’s has a degree in Applied Science and a Masters in Conflict Resolution. He works with CEOs, Board Members, corporate executives as well as business owners in a diverse range of fields. Peter also sits on 6 Government Dispute Resolution Panels, as a business mediator.
Peter will be attending the webinar where he will initially give a brief overview of his background career and experiences in establishing a range of businesses. This presentation will be facilitated by Dr Leon Levin in an interactive and inquiring manner whereby key threads of the dissertation will be causally linked to key learning outcomes and critical theoretical scaffolds. After this dissertation, the forum will be opened to the audience where they will be invited to ask questions and challenge Peter on issues of their choosing. This aspect of the RLCS will in part reflect the preliminary research methodology adopted by the students in preparation of their key deliverable which is a report. (It will be assumed that prior to the RLCS presentation that students would have research and prepared in advance, so their questioning is both relevant and focused) Peter has graciously agreed to students contacting him both prior to and after the dissertation to assist them in fulfilling the requirements of the assessment. The foundation strategic approach of the RLCS is to morph the academic and theoretical learning experiences to a real-world example, outcomes that will be of value in not only undertaking assessments 2 and 3 but post-university life.
In creating your report, the following consideration should be considered:
• In your view what was Peter’s key strategic intention in establishing his businesses
• What were the value propositions and how did these propositions add to Peter’s competitive advantage?
• What were the socio/economic macro and micro variables that Peter needed to consider in creating his businesses?
• What are the skills that the Peter had in creating his businesses, do you believe he was lacking any skills and if so, how did he address that short coming?
• How did Peter finance his business?
• How would you define Peter’s leadership style, and how would you see that style impacting on the corporate culture of his businesses?
• Do you believe that Peter’s approach was homogeneous in developing TriStar (a family
business) and Bond National (Sole trader) or would he needed to adapt?
Report format: This should include the following attributes:
• Executive Summary
• Macro analysis of the environment in which the venture(s) will be established
• Clear strategic definition of the business
• A research foundation upon which the analysis will be based
• In depth discussion as to the key attributes (internal/external) outlined in the RLCS
• Final observations based on the above analyse
Report Scaffold: the presentation of the report should embrace
• Use of headings and sub heading where required
• Justified font, 12 point and 1 ½ spacing
• One point on paragraph
• Where diagrams and images are used, they must be causally related to the narrative
• Assertions validated by in text referencing and research based question construction
• Assertion foundations based on theory
• Be creative
Personal Student Checklist
My submitted assignment report is within the specified word limit ?
I have included references using specified referencing style ?
I have correctly cited all my sources and references ?
I have formatted my report as per the specifications ?
I have checked my Turnitin report to ensure the similarity report is acceptable and explainable ?
The work I have submitted is the best it could be and I’m proud of my efforts ?
Have I prepared effectively for the questioning and inquiry ?
I have completed proof reading and checked for spelling and grammar ?
I have submitted my work before the due date/time ?
Some Helpful Websites and Resources
• ACU Library
How do I submit?
• Electronic submission using LEO through Turnitin
• Please include your student ID number and your name in the assignment file name.
• Submit one soft copy via LEO (link on unit site under Assessment). Please ensure you save a copy of your document before submitting it.
• Include the checklist below in your assessment document
• You must keep a backup copy of every assignment you submit, until the marked assignment has been returned to you. In the unlikely event that one of your assignments is misplaced, you will need to submit your backup copy.
Any work you submit may be checked by electronic or other means for the purposes of detecting collusion and/or plagiarism
Who can help me?
Staff help: Dr Leon Levin firstname.lastname@example.org phone 0421 763 101
Additional avenues for help include:
Academic skills Unit (ASU)
Post a question to the LEO discussion forum
Book a consultation with the National Lecturer in Charge: Dr Leon Levin (email@example.com)
I’m having problems
SC: Application for Special Consideration Complete this form if you wish to be exempted from academic penalty because your study has been affected by unforeseen circumstances.
EX: Application for extension of time for submission of an Assessment Task Complete this form if you wish to apply for extension of time for submission of this Assessment Task.
All referencing should be in ACU Harvard style. Details on referencing are available
If you are coming from another faculty, you may choose to use your usual referencing style. If this is the case, you must indicate at the top of your reference list what referencing style you are using (e.g. APA, MLA, Chicago, etc).
Please ensure your assignment makes use of in-text citations and a reference list. Missing citations or references is equivalent to plagiarism.
The full criteria is compiled in a rubric, which can be found on the following page/s.
Optional Student Feedback Request Proforma
All students will receive feedback on their assessment based on the rubric. If you would like to get specific feedback on this assignment, fill in the following table and submit it along with your assignment. Please put in comments about particular feedback you are seeking as well as providing feedback on the assessment to help us in the process of continuous improvement.
Questions Student’s Response
What are the main strengths of this work?
What areas need improvement in this work?
What do I need to focus on to improve my grade in the next assessment?
Provide constructive feedback on this assessment for improvement.
Rubric for assessment 1 25%
Criteria – (GA Linkage)
Expectations Meets Expectations Exceeds Expectations
NN (0-49%) PA (50-60%) CR (65-74%) DI (75-84%) HD (85-100%)
LO1 - GA6
Apply relevant theories in addressing identified issues raised in the case (GA application Demonstration of knowledge and the ability to solve entrepreneurial problems) in the case
Unable to identify and use relevant theories to address issues within the RLCS, and/or where theories were identified they were not relevant or incorrectly applied
(0 – 1.9 marks)
Basic ability to identify and use relevant theories issues, however little if any associated analysis
Good overall ability to identify and use relevant theories to issues, however with occasional omission or inaccuracies. Most of the theories used are relevant in the context of the questions.
Very good ability identifies and use relevant theories to address issues; All the theories used are relevant in the context of the questions. Here there is solid evidence of critical analysis
(3.1 – 3.4 marks)
Exceptional ability to identify and use relevant theories to address issues. In addition, additional challenges and issues not readily observable within the case study were raised showing a high level of critical analysis
(3.5 – 4 marks)
LO2 – GA2
Analyze the innovation opportunities outlined in the RLCS and how those
opportunities were exploited by Peter Singer in growing his entrepreneurial enterprise (GA application -Societal considerations in the application of knowledge)
Unable to identify and analyse the potentials for innovation opportunities and facilities to exploit those opportunities in a specific context of the RLCS – little if any in text support and peer reviewed research
(0 – 1.9 marks)
Basic ability to identify and analyse the potentials for innovation opportunities and facilities to exploit those opportunities in a specific context of the RLCS – some in text peer reviewed support but limited in nature
Good overall ability to identify and analyse the potentials for innovation opportunities and facilities to exploit those opportunities in a specific context of the RLCS –in text peer reviewed support validated assertions made within the narrative
excellent ability to identify and analyse the potentials for innovation opportunities and facilities to exploit those opportunities in a specific context of the RLCS, in addition to showing high levels of critical analysis – significant in text peer reviewed support validated assertions made within the narrative
(3.1 – 3.4 marks)
outstanding ability to identify and analyse the potentials for innovation opportunities and facilities to exploit those opportunities in a specific context of the RLCS, in addition to showing high levels of critical analysis reflected in demonstrating elements not obvious within the RLCS – significant in text peer reviewed support validated assertions made within the narrative
(3.5 – 4 marks)
LO3 – GA3
Apply fundamental concepts underpinning entrepreneurship and innovation to justify the ethical issues associated with the RLCS (GA application – Ethical application of knowledge) in the case
Unable to apply fundamental concepts underpinning ethical issues associated with the RLCS. No peer reviewed support
(0 – 4.9 marks)
Limited ability to apply fundamental concepts underpinning ethical issues associated with the RLCS. limited peer reviewed support
(5 – 6.4 marks)
ability to apply fundamental concepts underpinning ethical issues associated with the RLCS, supported with solid peer reviewed support
(6.5 – 7.4 marks)
Excellent ability to apply fundamental concepts underpinning ethical issues associated with the RLCS with significant reviewed support. In addition, displayed effective
critical analysis in the narrative
(7.5 – 8.4 marks)
Exceptional ability to apply fundamental concepts underpinning ethical issues associated with the RLCS with significant reviewed support. In addition, displayed effective critical analysis in the narrative as well as identifying constructs not obvious in the case study narrative
(8.5 – 10 marks)
LO1 – GA5
Presentation (GA application – effective presentation of
theoretical/knowledge based creative presentation) in a written report coupled with active and focused questioning within the dissertation
Unprofessional presnetation, little if any effort made to present a easy to read report
Limited if any questioning
(0 - .9 marks)
Exceptable presnetation, adequately written and easy to follow, a degree of dissertainon involvemnt
(1 – 1.2 marks)
Effective presentation. With the use of a table of contents subheadings and a clear and precise narrative. Focused and involved questioning
(1.2 – 1.5 marks)
Excellent presentation. With the use of a table of contents subheadings, a clear and precise narrative, use of tables and support elements. Dynamic and incisive questioning
(1.6 – 1.75 marks)
outstanding presentation. With the use of a table of contents subheadings, a clear and precise narrative, use of tables and support elements. In addition, the submission reflects a creative approach to communicating the findings, outstanding and challenging questioning
(1.76 – 2 marks)