Research Methodology on local and international market forces facing businesses

Assessment Type: Assignment

            •           Question 1 (50%) Research Design Proposal  (3000 Words)and

            •           Question 2 (50%) Literature/ Evidence Review (3000 Words)

Indicative Assessment Requirements for the Module;-

Maximum Word Limit and Assessment weighting for each aspect within the assessment:

The overall limit for the assignment is 6,000 words

Section 1 Background                                    10 Marks

Section 2 Literature Review                           50 Marks

Section 3 Research Methodology                  30 Marks

Section 4 Data Analysis                                    5 Marks

Section 5 Ethics, Validity and Presentation      5 marks

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Description of Assessment Requirements

You are required to create a proposal for a research project aimed at a business related problem of opportunity. In addition, you must prepare a literature review and evidence review on your research proposal.

As part of the research design proposal a literature review and evidence review on the above topic, fully referenced, up to 3000 words must be included.

Guidelines for undertaking the Assignment / Marking criteria and marking allocation

The research proposal must include a background which describes the basic situation underlying your project.

It must include a statement of the problem or opportunity that is the aim of your project. It must describe the rationale for your project; why you wish to carry out this research and the benefits that will accrue from its successful conclusion.

You must create research objectives that when you successfully complete them, you will have the information that enables you to solve the problem or capitalise on the opportunity that is the aim of your research.

It must also include a literature review that evaluates the context for your research and sources academic research and models that are relevant to the project. It should include a critical evaluation of relevant theoretical and practical references and include breadth of understanding and depth of critical evaluation.  Reviews will require analysis and evaluation of evidence and sources and be informed by theory and appropriate practice.

You must evaluate and fully describe the research methods that will be necessary to successfully complete the research. Data collection methods must be selected and described which are consistent with the research philosophy necessary for its completion: these will include secondary and primary data sources. The methods by which the data you collect will be analyzed need to be justified.

Finally, ethical, validity and reliability issues relevant to the research must be discussed and a time plan for its completion must be calculated and displayed as a Gantt chart.

            •           Case Study, Business Development Plan and Dissertation topics can be used if required but it is not mandatory

            •           Discussion and debate on the above mentioned topics should be seen.

            •           There must be sufficient linkage between theory and practice.

            •           Harvard style of references should be used

Please ensure that the assignment has

Section 1 Background – 400 words

Is the overall context for the research well established?

Is the research topic interesting from an academic and practical perspective?

Is there a statement of the problem?

Is there a rationale for the topic?

Is it clear what aspects of the chosen topic will be researched?

Do the boundaries of the research make sense?

Is there a clear statement of the aim of the research?

Are research objectives included which are specific.

Are research questions matched to the research objectives?

Section 2 Literature Review - 2600 words

2.1 Introduction

 Is the domain explained?

Is there a rationale for the chosen topic?

Is there a wider point of reference?

2. 2 The Main Body

Is there a clear structure

Does the review flow into a logical progression?

Does the review convey the thinking of the writer?

 Use of secondary sources, citation, references, synthesis, critique, chronology, seminal works, models?

Is the current position conveyed?

Is there a set of emergent conclusions?

2. 3 Conclusion

Is there a clear concluding statement?

Is there a clear implication for further research?

Are research questions specified?

Are there emergent themes?

Is the literature review conclusive?

Section 3 Research Methodology – 2400 words

Is there a logical and cohesive structure to the proposal?

Are all the relevant sections included?

Is the approach adequately explained?

Is the scope of Literature outlined relevant to the research objectives to address the research questions?

Is the relevance of the literature, models, theories and frameworks for thinking justified?

Are the proposed research methods appropriate to the research task?

Have the data types been defined and classified?

Have target populations and samples been defined and justified?

Section 4 Data Analysis - 300 words

Is the proposal for analysis linked back to the literature and the research questions?

Have analysis methods been specified?

Section 5 Ethics, Validity and Presentation – 300 words

Are validity and reliability issues discussed?

Is there an adequate time plan for the research?

Have academic protocols for referencing been met?

Are the intended outcomes for the research made known, so there is a clear understanding of the value added?

Each student will receive an individual mark for their submission of their individual supporting contributions and documentation.

Learning Outcomes:

Upon successful completion of this module students will be able to:

            •           Formulate research questions and describe and critically evaluate differing research methods, including the formation of hypotheses, or other research models, or paradigms and justify the selection and use of specific research methodologies;

            •           Integrate and plan key research activities and schedules including the setting of timetables and research objectives, and the acceptance of accountability for all aspects of the conduct of a research project

            •           Understand the importance of, and be able to effectively demonstrate skills in, the conventions which are required for the carrying out of a major research project including the design of experimental and non-experimental research projects; the preparation of an integrated research proposal and effectively manage the design and delivery of this.

            •           Comprehend and critically evaluate the differentiation between qualitative and quantitative methods as they are used in research design and evaluate the appropriateness of their application, use, and value in differing aspects of business functions and requirements.

            •           Critically appraise the importance of, and the definitions and nature of, primary and secondary data, and be able to plan for (a) the selection, collection, or creation of data for interpretation and data analysis; and (b) critically analyse, interpret and manipulate data, and (c) synthesis results and interpretation of data and form conclusions.

            •           Assimilate and review an appropriate range of literature sources and other appropriate sources/evidential materials.

            •           Identify the underlying principles of various analytical methods commonly applied in business and management research;

            •           Select appropriate analytical techniques according to the nature of the research;

            •           Compute descriptive and inferential statistics using SPSS;

            •           Be able to communicate effectively in, numeric, verbal and literary form to a variety of audiences using appropriate business language, terminology, and concepts including Construct questionnaires, evaluate their reliability, and analyse and evaluate the data produced (quantitative/qualitative or other)

ASSIGNMENT MARKING CRITERIA

MARK

29 or less

30 - 39

40 - 49

50 - 59

60 – 69

70 +

CONTENT:

Has the question been answered?

Vague, random, unrelated material

Some mention of the issue, but a collection of disparate points

Barely answers the question – just reproduces what knows about the topic

Some looseness/

digressions

Well focused

Highly focused

TOPIC

KNOWLEDGE

Is there evidence of having read widely

and use of appropriate and  up to date material to make a case?

No evidence of reading.

No use of theory – not even hinted at implicitly.

No evidence of reading.

An implicit  hint at some knowledge of theory, etc.

No evidence of reading.  Very basic theories mentioned but not developed or well used.

Some reading evident, but confined to core texts.

Good reading.

Good range of theories included.

Excellent reading.

Well chosen theories.

UNDERSTANDING & SYNTHESIS

Are ideas summarized rather than being reproduced, and are they inter-related with other ideas?

No theory included.

Vague assertions/poor explanations.

Long winded descriptions of theory.

Some long winded sections.

Some quotations, but stand alone.

Some inter- connections.

Good summary of theory.

Good use of quotations that flow with narrative.

Good inter-connections.

Succinct, effective summaries of theory.  Excellent choice and threading of quotations into argument.  Good counterpoising of a range of perspectives.

APPLICATION

Does it show appropriate use of theory in a

practical situation?

No examples

No/limited/

inappropriate examples

Few examples

Uneven examples

Good examples

Excellent range of examples.

ANALYSIS

Does it identify the key issues, etc in a given scenario, proposal or argument?

Vague assertions about issues.

Largely descriptive with no identification and analysis of central issues.

Limited insight into issues.

Some good observations.

Good, detailed analysis.

Comprehensive range of issues identified and discussed fully.

EVALUATION & RECOMMENDATIONS

Does it critically assess material?

Are there a workable and imaginative solutions?

No evaluation.

Uncritical acceptance of material.

Some evaluation but weak.  Little insight.

Good interpretation.  Some but limited sophistication in argument.

Good critical assessment.  Independent thought displayed.

Full critical assessment and substantial individual insight.

REFERENCING

Thorough and accurate citation and referencing

No referencing

No referencing

Limited/poor referencing

Some inconsistencies in referencing

Appropriate referencing

Appropriate referencing

PRESENTATION

Logical and coherent structure to argument and effective presentation

No structure apparent.

Poor presentation.

Poor structure.

Poor presentation.

Acceptable, but uneven structure.

Reasonable presentation.

Reasonable structure.

Good presentation.

Good argument.

Well presented material.

Excellent argument.

Very effective presentation format.