Comprehensive case study: International Management

ASSESSMENT BRIEF – 4
COURSE: Bachelor of Business / Bachelor of Accounting
Unit Code:
Unit Title: ITMG306
Type of Assessment: Comprehensive case study
Length/Duration: Two comprehensive case studies (1,250X2 =2500 words).
Unit Learning Outcomes
addressed:
1. Demonstrate an understanding of the concepts and theoretical
frameworks associated to International Management
2. Assess importance of culture and its impact on international
management
3. Analyse the impact of global business environment on international
management
4. Identify and evaluate key ethical, environment, social and cultural
issues in global businesses and their implications in business decisions/
practice
5. Identify and assess prominent managerial issues faced by multinational
enterprises today
6. Apply theories, tools and frameworks to analyse business situations
and make strategic decisions in the international business context
7. Analyse and present (both written and oral) business cases
underpinning current practices of global business strategies.
Submission Date: Week 14
Assessment Task: Comprehensive case study analysis
Total Mark: 100 converted to 40 marks
Weighting: 40%
Students are advised that submission of an Assessment Task past the due date without a formally
signed approved Assignment Extension Form (Kent Website MyKent Student Link> FORM – Assignment
Extension Application Form – Student Login Required) or previously approved application for other
extenuating circumstances impacting course of study, incurs a 5% penalty per calendar day,
calculated by deduction from the total mark.
For example. An Assessment Task marked out of 40 will incur a 2 mark penalty for each calendar day.
More information, please refer to (Kent Website MyKent Student Link> POLICY – Assessment Policy &
Kent Institute Australia Pty. Ltd.
Assessment Brief ABN 49 003 577 302 CRICOS Code: 00161E RTO Code: 90458
Version 2: 11th October, 2019 Page 2 of 4 TEQSA Provider Number: PRV12051
Procedures – Student Login Required)
ASSESSMENT DESCRIPTION:
Your final assessment is an individual written assignment of approx. 2,500 words as per the following description:
Students are required to answer questions based on two comprehensive case studies. Word limit of each case
study is 1,250 words. These case studies will be uploaded on the Moodle site in week 10 along with the guidelines
to attempt it.
ASSESSMENT SUBMISSION:
The final assessment for all students is due at 11.59 pm on Sunday of Week 14.
The assignment must be submitted online in Moodle. All materials must be submitted electronically in Microsoft
Word format (other formats e.g., pdf or mac file may not be readable by markers). No paper-based or hardcopy
submission will be accepted.
Please note that this is an individual assessment and any similarity score greater than 20% will be treated as
academic misconduct.
No referencing of sources is required for either part of this final assessment.
MARKING GUIDE (RUBRIC): 40%
Marking
Criteria.
Fail (0-9.9) Pass (10-12.5) Credit (13-14.5) Distinction (15-16.5) High Distinction (17-
20)
Research
10 Marks
Little evidence of
research.
Sources are
missing,
Inappropriate,
poorly integrated
or lacking
credibility. Lacks
clear link of
sources with
essay
Textbook and 4 other
relevant peer reviewed
sources. Basic use of
sources to support
ideas, generally well
integrated, most sources
are credible. May be
weaknesses with
paraphrasing or
integration/application
Research is
generally thorough.
Good use of sources
to support ideas,
mostly well
integrated, sources
are credible. May
be weaknesses with
paraphrasing or
integration/
application.
Thorough research is
indicated. Very good
use of sources to
support ideas, well
integrated, sources are
credible. May be minor
weaknesses with
paraphrasing or
integration/application.
Thorough research is
indicated. Professional
use of sources to support
ideas, well integrated,
sources are credible. Very
minor, if any, weaknesses
with paraphrasing
integration/application.
Information /
Content
10 Marks
Report lacks
coherence; topic
is poorly
addressed; little
analysis.
Report is generally
coherent; topic is
addressed; analyses in
reasonable depth with
some description. There
are some inconsistencies
and weaknesses with
flow.
Report is coherent
and flows well;
topic is addressed
quite thoroughly;
analyses in
considerable depth.
There may be some
inconsistencies and
weaknesses with
flow.
Report is very coherent
and flows well; topic is
addressed thoroughly;
analyses in depth.
There may be minor
inconsistencies and
weakness with flow.
Professional work. Report
is very coherent and flows
well; topic is addressed
thoroughly; analyses in
great depth. Very minor, if
any, inconsistencies and
weaknesses with flow.
Structure
10 Marks
Topic, concepts
are not clear in
introduction.
Material in the
body is generally
poorly sequenced.
No discernible
conclusion; no
links to
introduction.
Topic, concepts are
generally stated with
some clarity in
introduction. Material in
body is generally
logically sequenced;
some weaknesses.
Conclusion does not
clearly summarise
report, links to
introduction are not
clear.
Topic, concepts are
moderately
outlined in
introduction.
Material in body is
logically and
broadly sequenced;
with some minor
weaknesses.
Conclusion broadly
summarises report
with
recommendations
and broadly links to
introduction.
Topic, concepts are
clearly outlined in
introduction. Material
in body is logically and
clearly sequenced; very
few or minor
weaknesses.
Conclusion mostly
effectively summarises
report with
recommendations and
clear links to
introduction.
Topic, concepts are clearly
outlined in introduction.
Material in body is
logically and clearly
sequenced; very minor, if
any, weaknesses.
Conclusion effectively
summarises report with
recommendations and
clear links to introduction.
Language/
Presentation/
5 Marks
Referencing
5 marks
Poor standard of
writing. Word
limit may not be
adhered to. No or
minimal reference
list, mixed styles.
Maximum 1000 words
Basic and sound
standard of writing;
some errors in
punctuation, grammar
and spelling. Reference
list is generally complete
with 1 or 2 references
Good standard of
writing; few errors
in punctuation,
grammar and
spelling. Few
inaccuracies in
reference list and all
references listed.
Very good standard of
writing; very few or
minor errors in
punctuation, grammar
and spelling. Thorough
and consistent
reference list and all
references listed.
Professional standard of
writing; no errors in
punctuation, grammar
and spelling. Professional
level of referencing and
acknowledgment; no
errors of style evident.
Kent Institute Australia Pty. Ltd.
Assessment Brief ABN 49 003 577 302 CRICOS Code: 00161E RTO Code: 90458
Version 2: 11th October, 2019 Page 3 of 4 TEQSA Provider Number: PRV12051
Total 10marks missing.
Kent Institute Australia Pty. Ltd.
Assessment Brief ABN 49 003 577 302 CRICOS Code: 00161E RTO Code: 90458
Version 2: 11th October, 2019 Page 4 of 4 TEQSA Provider Number: PRV12051
GENERAL NOTES FOR ASSESSMENT TASKS [NOT APPLICABLE FOR THIS ASSIGNMENT]
Content for Assessment Task papers should incorporate a formal introduction, main points and conclusion.
Appropriate academic writing and referencing are inevitable academic skills that you must develop and
demonstrate in work being presented for assessment. The content of high quality work presented by a student
must be fully referenced within-text citations and a Reference List at the end. Kent strongly recommends you
refer to the Academic Learning Support Workshop materials available on the Kent Learning Management System
(Moodle). For details please click the link http://moodle.kent.edu.au/kentmoodle/mod/folder/view.php?id=3606
and download the file titled “Harvard Referencing Workbook”. This Moodle Site is the location for Workbooks
and information that are presented to Kent Students in the ALS Workshops conducted at the beginning of each
Trimester.
Kent recommends a minimum of FIVE (5) references in work being presented for assessment. Unless otherwise
specifically instructed by your Lecturer or as detailed in the Unit Outline for the specific Assessment Task, any
paper with less than five (5) references may be deemed not meeting a satisfactory standard and possibly be failed.
Content in Assessment tasks that includes sources that are not properly referenced according to the “Harvard
Referencing Workbook” will be penalised.
Marks will be deducted for failure to adhere to the word count if this is specifically stated for the Assessment Task
in the Unit Outline. As a general rule there is an allowable discretionary variance to the word count in that it is
generally accepted that a student may go over or under by 10% than the stated length.
GENERAL NOTES FOR REFERENCING
References are assessed for their quality. Students should draw on quality academic sources, such as books,
chapters from edited books, journals etc. The textbook for the Unit of study can be used as a reference, but not
the Lecturer Notes. The Assessor will want to see evidence that a student is capable of conducting their own
research. Also, in order to help Assessors determine a student’s understanding of the work they cite, all in-text
references (not just direct quotes) must include the specific page number(s) if shown in the original. Before
preparing your Assessment Task or own contribution, please review this ‘YouTube’ video (Avoiding Plagiarism
through Referencing) by clicking on the following link: link:
http://moodle.kent.edu.au/kentmoodle/mod/folder/view.php?id=3606
A search for peer-reviewed journal articles may also assist students. These type of journal articles can be located
in the online journal databases and can be accessed from the Kent Library homepage. Wikipedia, online
dictionaries and online encyclopaedias are acceptable as a starting point to gain knowledge about a topic, but
should not be over-used – these should constitute no more than 10% of your total list of references/sources.
Additional information and literature can be used where these are produced by legitimate sources, such as
government departments, research institutes such as the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC),
or international organisations such as the World Health Organisation (WHO). Legitimate organisations and
government departments produce peer reviewed reports and articles and are therefore very useful and mostly
very current. The content of the following link explains why it is not acceptable to use non-peer reviewed websites
(Why can’t I just Google?): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N39mnu1Pkgw
(thank you to La Trobe University for access to this video).
Order Now

Calculate a fair price for your paper

Such a cheap price for your free time and healthy sleep

1650 words
-
-
Place an order within a couple of minutes.
Get guaranteed assistance and 100% confidentiality.
Total price: $78
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, how can I help?