Research Methods for Managers

Faculty: Lord Ashcroft International Business School

Module Code: MOD001104

Academic Year: 2012/2013 Semesters: 1, 2 and 3

Contents 1. Key Information ................................................................................................... 3 2. Introduction to the Module.................................................................................. 3 3. Intended Learning Outcomes ............................................................................. 4 4. Outline Delivery ................................................................................................... 5 4.1 Attendance Requirements ................................................................................ 5 5. Assessment ......................................................................................................... 6 6. How is My Work Marked? ................................................................................... 8 7. Assessment Criteria and Marking Standards 11 8. Assessment Offences ....................................................................................... 13 9. Learning Resources .......................................................................................... 15 9.1. Library ............................................................................................................. 15 10. Module Evaluation ........................................................................................... 16 11. Report on Last Delivery of Module ................................................................. 16

1. Key Information Module/Unit title: Module Leader: Research Methods for Managers Dr. George Panagiotou London School of Marketing LS Education Group Email: drgeorgepanagiotou@googlemail.com

Module Tutors:

Nayani Perere (Online Delivery) Gayan Jayasinghe (Online Delivery)

Every module has a Module Definition Form (MDF) which is the officially validated record of the module. You can access the MDF for this module in three ways via: the Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) the My.Anglia Module Catalogue at www.anglia.ac.uk/modulecatalogue Anglia Ruskins module search engine facility at www.anglia.ac.uk/modules

All modules delivered by Anglia Ruskin University at its main campuses in the UK and at Associate Colleges throughout the UK and overseas are governed by the Academic Regulations. You can view these at www.anglia.ac.uk/academicregs. A printed extract of the Academic Regulations, known as the Assessment Regulations, is available for every student from your Faculty Office (all new students will have received a copy as part of their welcome pack). In the unlikely event of any discrepancy between the Academic Regulations and any other publication, including this module guide, the Academic Regulations, as the definitive document, take precedence over all other publications and will be applied in all cases. 2. Introduction to the Module This module provides course participants with the appropriate knowledge, skills and abilities they will need to effectively carry out a piece of small scale business / management research. A particular emphasis will be placed upon developing individuals towards their workplace based Masters dissertation / project. A focus is given to the specific issues faced by managers and researchers when carrying out research in an organisational setting. These will include the philosophical aspects of enquiry in social settings, operating in political contexts, negotiating access to key individuals and data, and meeting the research outcomes expected by multiple organisational stakeholders. Consequently, this module will focus on providing individuals with the skills necessary to meet these challenges and therefore effectively plan, carry out and report upon their Masters level dissertation / project. One of the main focuses for the design of this module has been the further development of relevant employability and professional skills. Such skills are implicit in the learning outcomes. Multiculturalism has been considered during the design of this module and will be considered when the assessment brief is written.

3. Intended Learning Outcomes On successful completion of this module you will be able to: 7. Learning Outcomes (threshold standards): On successful completion of this module the student will be expected to be able to: Knowledge and understanding 1. Demonstrate a critical understanding of the different approaches to research used in business / management and the social sciences. 2. Identify and justify decisions regarding their chosen topic, research questions and research methodology. Intellectual, practical, affective and transferable skills 3. Synthesise and critically evaluate the current theoretical and methodological developments in their chosen field of study, making clear their own contributions to this body of work. 4. Demonstrate the required skills and abilities needed to successfully plan, organise, undertake and communicate the findings of, a piece of small scale business / management research.

4. Outline Delivery Indicative content for the module Each masters module will be structured according to the relevant discipline, but in general the following headings outline what would normally be covered within the curriculum. The nature of business and management research and its significance for researchers-ethics, politics, power, gender, the action imperative, expectations of sponsors/clients, stakeholders and researchers. Theories and conceptual frameworks perspectives on research methodologies positivist and phenomenological paradigms, variety of forms of research. Methods and techniques Quantitative and Qualitative research, primary and secondary data, participant-observation, action research, ethnography, questionnaires, documentary analysis, data storage, sampling theory, hypothesis testing, interviewing and recording. Research Design research proposals, research questions, literature reviews, construction of research frameworks, choice of investigative methods, data collection, analysis and interpretation, formulating conclusions and recommendations. Constraints gaining acceptance, entry and intervention issues, bias, data access, client/researcher relationships and multiple client dilemmas, researcher as change agent, micropolitics and confidentiality. Presentation structuring and sequencing the dissertation and write-up, the canons of scholarly writing, potential uses of findings and expectations of clients, summaries and dissemination.

4.1 Attendance Requirements Attending all your classes is very important and one of the best ways to help you succeed in this module. In accordance with the Student Charter, you are expected to arrive on time and take an active part in all your timetabled classes. If you are unable to attend a class for a valid reason (eg: illness), please contact your Module Tutor. . Anglia Ruskin will closely monitor the attendance of all students and will contact you by e-mail if you have been absent without notice for two weeks. Continued absence can result in various consequences including the termination of your registration as you will be considered to have withdrawn from your studies. International students who are non-EEA nationals and in possession of entry clearance/leave to remain as a student (student visa) are required to be in regular attendance at Anglia Ruskin. Failure to do so is considered to be a breach of national immigration regulations. Anglia Ruskin, like all British Universities, is statutorily obliged to inform the UK Border Agency of the Home Office of significant unauthorised absences by any student visa holders.

5. Assessment ASSIGNMENT INSTRUCTIONS Module Title: Module Code: Academic Year: Research Methods for Managers BC415020S 2012/2013 Level: Semesters: 7 1/2

Module Leader: Instructions: Word Limit:

Dr. George Panagiotou Address the following task. 4,000 words. In determining the text to be included within the maximum word limit please refer to Assessment Regulations July 2008. 6.57 to 6.59.

Written assignments must not exceed the specified maximum number of words. All assignments which do so will be penalised. The penalty will be the deduction of 10% of the maximum marks available (i.e. 10%). Assignments will not be accepted without a word count on the cover sheet. Submission Date: This assignment must be submitted to the IMSS no later than 5.00 pm on 21 December 2012

A mark of zero is awarded for any assignment submitted after the published deadline unless an extension to the deadline has been approved. See Assessment Regulations 6.45 to 6.56. A student may request an extension to a submission deadline when circumstances outside the students control have arisen which prevents submission or are likely to result in significant underperformance if the original deadline is enforced. Students must submit their request for mitigation to a Student Advisor before the submission deadline. Please see Assessment Regulation 6.81-6.94 Mitigation Date: The deadline for submission of mitigation in relation to this assignment is no later than FIVE working days after the submission date. See Assessment Regulations 6.87. This assignment must be completed individually. This assignment must be attached to a completed University Assignment Cover Sheet and accompanied by a completed University Assignment Receipt before submission.

Further details:

STRUCTURE AND MARKING CRITERIA 1. Introduction (20%) a)Title: initially this might be regarded as a working title, and ideally should mirror closely the content of the document. b) Background: This informs the reader of the problem or the situation, and the context you are interested in. c) Rationale for the study. What is the research issue? Why is it an issue? Why is it an issue now? What could this research shed light on? d) Research aims, objectives, questions or hypothesis. 2. Literature Review and Conceptual Framework (30%) This section will demonstrate your knowledge of the literature and make a critical link with the situation to be investigated. Students are expected to critically review 5 or 6 sources to underpin the study in order to produce a conceptual framework. 3. Research Design and Methodology: (40%) This section gives a detailed rationale of the following: Explain the selection of your research paradigm. Explain the choice of your chosen methodology. Explain the rationale and choice of your research methods, for example how you will access data and your methods of data capture. Explain how you intend to analyse your data. Ethical issues in your proposed research journey 4.Timetable and resources (10%) Provide a plan of how you will use your available time to complete your proposed research. This will give an indication of viability of your research proposal. The research process always seems to take longer than anticipated. Justify your plan.

Feedback You are entitled to feedback on your performance for all your assessed work. For all assessment tasks which are not examinations, this is provided by a member of academic staff completing the assignment coversheet on which your mark and feedback will relate to the achievement of the modules intended learning outcomes and the assessment criteria you were given for the task when it was first issued. Examination scripts are retained by Anglia Ruskin and are not returned to students. However, you are entitled to feedback on your performance in an examination and may request a meeting with the Module Leader or Tutor to see your examination script and to discuss your performance.

Anglia Ruskin is committed to providing you with feedback on all assessed work within 20 working days of the submission deadline or the date of an examination. This is extended to 30 days for feedback for a Major Project module (please note that working days excludes those days when Anglia Ruskin University is officially closed; eg: between Christmas and New Year). Personal tutors will offer to read feedback from several modules and help you to address any common themes that may be emerging. At the main Anglia Ruskin University and our associate and partner institutes and colleges campuses, each Faculty will publish details of the arrangement for the return of your assessed work (eg: a marked essay or case study etc.). Any work which is not collected by you from the Faculty within this timeframe is returned to the iCentres from where you can subsequently collect it. The iCentres retain student work for a specified period prior to its disposal. On occasion, you will receive feedback and marks for pieces of work that you completed in the earlier stages of the module. We provide you with this feedback as part of the learning experience and to help you prepare for other assessment tasks that you have still to complete. It is important to note that, in these cases, the marks for these pieces of work are unconfirmed. This means that, potentially, marks can change, in either direction! Marks for modules and individual pieces of work become confirmed on the Dates for the Official Publication of Results which can be checked at www.anglia.ac.uk/results. 6. How is My Work Marked? After you have handed your work in or you have completed an examination, Anglia Ruskin undertakes a series of activities to assure that our marking processes are comparable with those employed at other universities in the UK and that your work has been marked fairly and honestly. These include: Anonymous marking your name is not attached to your work so, at the point of marking, the lecturer does not know whose work he/she is considering. When you undertake an assessment task where your identity is known (e.g. a presentation or Major Project), it is marked by more than one lecturer (known as double marking) Internal moderation a sample of all work for each assessment task in each module is moderated by other Anglia Ruskin staff to check the marking standards and consistency of the marking External moderation a sample of student work for all modules is moderated by external examiners experienced academic staff from other universities (and sometimes practitioners who represent relevant professions) - who scrutinise your work and provide Anglia Ruskin academic staff with feedback, advice and assurance that the marking of your work is comparable to that in other UK universities. Many of Anglia Ruskins staff act as external examiners at other universities. Departmental Assessment Panel (DAP) performance by all students on all modules is discussed and approved at the appropriate DAPs which are attended by all relevant Module Leaders and external examiners. Anglia Ruskin has over 25 DAPs to cover all the different subjects we teach. This module falls within the remit of the International Business, Strategy and Economics DAP. The following external examiners are appointed to this DAP and will oversee the assessment of this and other modules within the DAPs remit:

External Examiners Name Des Doran

Academic Institution Brunel University

Position or Employer Lecturer Supply Chain Management

The above list is correct at the time of publication. However, external examiners are appointed at various points throughout the year. An up-to-date list of external examiners is available to internal browsers only at www.anglia.ac.uk/eeinfo.

Anglia Ruskins marking process is represented in the flowchart below:

Flowchart of Anglia Ruskins Marking Processes

Student submits work / sits examination Work collated and passed to Module Leader

Marking Stage

Work is marked by Module Leader and Module Tutor(s)1. All marks collated by Module Leader for ALL locations2

Internal Moderation Stage

Internal moderation samples selected. Moderation undertaken by a second academic3

Any issues?

YES

NO Students receive initial (unconfirmed) feedback Unconfirmed marks and feedback to students within 20 working days (30 working days for Major Projects)

External Moderation Stage

External moderation samples selected and moderated by External Examiners4

Any issues? NO Marks submitted to DAP5 for consideration and approval

YES

DAP4 Stage

Confirmed marks issued to students via e-Vision

Marks Approved by DAP5 and forwarded to Awards Board

1 2

All work is marked anonymously or double marked where identity of the student is known (eg: in a presentation) The internal (and external) moderation process compares work from all locations where the module is delivered (eg: Cambridge, Chelmsford, Peterborough, Malaysia, India, Trinidad etc.) The sample for the internal moderation process comprises a minimum of eight pieces of work or 10% (whichever is the greater) for each marker and covers the full range of marks Only modules at levels 5, 6 and 7 are subject to external moderation (unless required for separate reasons). The sample for the external moderation process comprises a minimum of eight pieces of work or 10% (whichever is the greater) for the entire module and covers the full range of marks DAP: Departmental Assessment Panel Anglia Ruskin has over 25 different DAPs to reflect our subject coverage

10

7. Assessment Criteria and Marking Standards Level 7

Level 7 is characterised by an expectation of students expertise in their specialism. Students are semiautonomous, demonstrating independence in the negotiation of assessment tasks (including the major project) and the ability to evaluate, challenge, modify and develop theory and practice. Students are expected to demonstrate an ability to isolate and focus on the significant features of problems and to offer synthetic and coherent solutions, with some students producing original or innovative work in their specialism that is worthy of publication or public performance or display. Generic Learning Outcomes (GLOs) (Academic Regulations, Section 2) Mark Bands Outcome Knowledge & Understanding Intellectual (thinking), Practical, Affective and Transferable Skills Exceptional analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics. Exceptional development of conceptual structures and argument, making consistent use of scholarly conventions. Exceptional research skills, independence of thought, an extremely high level of intellectual rigour and consistency, exceptional expressive/professional skills, and substantial creativity and originality. Exceptional academic/intellectual skills. Work pushes the boundaries of the discipline and may be considered for external publication Outstanding analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics. Very high level development of conceptual structures and argument, making consistent use of scholarly conventions. Outstanding research skills, independence of thought, a high level of intellectual rigour and consistency, outstanding expressive/professional skills, and considerable creativity and originality. Exemplary academic/intellectual skills Excellent analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics. High level development of conceptual structures and argument, making consistent use of scholarly conventions. Excellent research skills, independence of thought, a high level of intellectual rigour and consistency, excellent expressive/ professional skills, and considerable creativity and originality. Excellent academic/intellectual skills, and considerable creativity and originality Good analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics. Development of conceptual

90100% Characteristics of Student Achievement by Marking Band

Exceptional analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics with very clear originality and autonomy. Exceptional development of conceptual structures and argument making an exceptional use of scholarly conventions. Demonstrates independence of thought and a very high level of intellectual rigour and consistency. Work pushes the boundaries of the discipline and may be considered for external publication

80-89%

Achieves module outcome(s) related to GLO at this level

Outstanding analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics with clear originality and autonomy. Outstanding development of conceptual structures and argument making an exemplary use of scholarly conventions. Demonstrates independence of thought and a very high level of intellectual rigour and consistency

70-79%

Excellent analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics. Excellent development of conceptual structures and argument making excellent use of scholarly conventions. Demonstrates independence of thought and a high level of intellectual rigour and consistency

60-69%

Good analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics. Development of conceptual 11

50-59%

structures and argument making consistent use of scholarly conventions Satisfactory knowledge of key issues/ concepts/ethics in discipline. Descriptive in parts but some ability to synthesise scholarship and argument. Minor lapses in use of scholarly conventions A marginal pass in module outcome(s) related to GLO at this level A marginal fail in module outcome(s) related to GLO at this level. Possible compensation . Sat-isfies qualifying mark Basic knowledge of key issues/concepts/ethics in discipline. Generally descriptive, with restricted synthesis of existing scholarship and little argument. Use of scholarly conventions inconsistent

structures and argument, making consistent use of scholarly conventions Satisfactory knowledge of key issues/ concepts/ethics in discipline. Descriptive in parts but some ability to synthesise scholarship and argument. Minor lapses in use of scholarly conventions Basic knowledge of key issues/concepts/ethics in discipline. Generally descriptive, with restricted synthesis of existing scholarship and little argument. Use of scholarly conventions inconsistent.

40-49%

30-39%

Limited knowledge of key issues/concepts/ethics in discipline. Largely descriptive, with restricted synthesis of existing scholarship and limited argument. Limited use of scholarly conventions.

Limited research skills impede use of learning resources and problem solving. Significant problems with structure/accuracy in expression. Team/Practical/ Professional skills not yet secure. Weak academic/ intellectual skills. Limited use of scholarly conventions

20-29%

10-19%

Fails to achieve module outcome(s) related to this GLO. Qualifying mark not satisfied. No compensation available

1-9%

0%

Little evidence of research skills, use Little evidence of knowledge of key of learning resources and problem issues/concepts/ethics in discipline. solving. Major problems with Largely descriptive, with little structure/ accuracy in expression. synthesis of existing scholarship and Team/Practical/Professional skills little evidence of argument. Little virtually absent. Very weak evidence of use of scholarly academic/intellectual skills. Little conventions. evidence of use of scholarly conventions Inadequate use of research skills, learning resources and problem Inadequate knowledge of key solving. Major problems with issues/concepts/ethics in discipline. structure/accuracy in expression. Wholly descriptive, with inadequate Team/Practical/Professional skills synthesis of existing scholarship and absent. Extremely weak inadequate argument. Inadequate academic/intellectual skills. use of scholarly conventions. Inadequate use of scholarly conventions No evidence of use of research skills, No evidence of knowledge of key learning resources and problem issues/concepts/ethics in discipline. solving. Incoherent Incoherent and completely but poorly structure/accuracy in expression. descriptive, with no evidence of Team/Practical/Professional skills synthesis of existing scholarship and non-existent. No evidence of no argument whatsoever. No academic/intellectual skills. No evidence of use of scholarly evidence of use of scholarly conventions. conventions Awarded for: (i) non-submission; (ii) dangerous practice and; (iii) in situations where the student fails to address the assignment brief (eg: answers the wrong question) and/or related learning outcomes

12

8. Assessment Offences As an academic community, we recognise that the principles of truth, honesty and mutual respect are central to the pursuit of knowledge. Behaviour that undermines those principles diminishes the community, both individually and collectively, and diminishes our values. We are committed to ensuring that every student and member of staff is made aware of the responsibilities s/he bears in maintaining the highest standards of academic integrity and how those standards are protected. You are reminded that any work that you submit must be your own. When you are preparing your work for submission, it is important that you understand the various academic conventions that you are expected to follow in order to make sure that you do not leave yourself open to accusations of plagiarism (eg: the correct use of referencing, citations, footnotes etc.) and that your work maintains its academic integrity. Definitions of Assessment Offences Plagiarism Plagiarism is theft and occurs when you present someone elses work, words, images, ideas, opinions or discoveries, whether published or not, as your own. It is also when you take the artwork, images or computer-generated work of others, without properly acknowledging where this is from or you do this without their permission. You can commit plagiarism in examinations, but it is most likely to happen in coursework, assignments, portfolios, essays, dissertations and so on. Examples of plagiarism include: directly copying from written work, physical work, performances, recorded work or images, without saying where this is from; using information from the internet or electronic media (such as DVDs and CDs) which belongs to someone else, and presenting it as your own; rewording someone elses work, without referencing them; and handing in something for assessment which has been produced by another student or person.

It is important that you do not plagiarise intentionally or unintentionally because the work of others and their ideas are their own. There are benefits to producing original ideas in terms of awards, prizes, qualifications, reputation and so on. To use someone elses work, words, images, ideas or discoveries is a form of theft. Collusion Collusion is similar to plagiarism as it is an attempt to present anothers work as your own. In plagiarism the original owner of the work is not aware you are using it, in collusion two or more people may be involved in trying to produce one piece of work to benefit one individual, or plagiarising another persons work. Examples of collusion include: agreeing with others to cheat; getting someone else to produce part or all of your work; copying the work of another person (with their permission); submitting work from essay banks; paying someone to produce work for you; and allowing another student to copy your own work.

Many parts of university life need students to work together. Working as a team, as directed by your tutor, and producing group work is not collusion. Collusion only happens if you produce joint work to benefit of one or more person and try to deceive another (for example the assessor).

13

Cheating Cheating is when someone aims to get unfair advantage over others. Examples of cheating include: taking unauthorised material into the examination room; inventing results (including experiments, research, interviews and observations); handing your own previously graded work back in; getting an examination paper before it is released; behaving in a way that means other students perform poorly; pretending to be another student; and trying to bribe members of staff or examiners.

Help to Avoid Assessment Offences Most of our students are honest and want to avoid making assessment offences. We have a variety of resources, advice and guidance available to help make sure you can develop good academic skills. We will make sure that we make available consistent statements about what we expect. You will be able to do tutorials on being honest in your work from the library and other central support services and faculties, and you will be able to test your written work for plagiarism using TurnitinUK (a software package that detects plagiarism). You can get advice on how to honestly use the work of others in your own work from the library website (www.libweb.anglia.ac.uk/referencing/referencing.htm) and your lecturer and personal tutor. You will be able to use TurnitinUK, a special software package which is used to detect plagiarism. TurnitinUK will produce a report which clearly shows if passages in your work have been taken from somewhere else. You may talk about this with your personal tutor to see where you may need to improve your academic practice. We will not see these formative TurnitinUK reports as assessment offences. If you are not sure whether the way you are working meets our requirements, you should talk to your personal tutor, module tutor or other member of academic staff. They will be able to help you and tell you about other resources which will help you develop your academic skills.

Procedures for assessment offences An assessment offence is the general term used to define cases where a student has tried to get unfair academic advantage in an assessment for himself or herself or another student. We will fully investigate all cases of suspected assessment offences. If we prove that you have committed an assessment offence, an appropriate penalty will be imposed which, for the most serious offences, includes expulsion from Anglia Ruskin. For full details of our assessment offences policy and procedures, see the Academic Regulations, section 10 at: www.anglia.ac.uk/academicregs To see an expanded version of this guidance which provides more information on how to avoid assessment offences, visit www.anglia.ac.uk/honesty.

14

9. Learning Resources 9.1. Library Library Contacts Faculty of Arts, Law and Social Sciences libteam.alss@anglia.ac.uk Lord Ashcroft International Business School libteam.aibs@anglia.ac.uk Faculty of Health, Social Care and Education libteam.fhsce@anglia.ac.uk Faculty of Science and Technology libteam.fst@anglia.ac.uk READING LIST

Collis, J & Hussey, R

Business Research; A Practical Guide for Undergraduate and Postgraduate Students, Palgrave Macmillan

9.2 Other resources

Saunders M.,Lewis P., Thornhill A. Bryman, A Creswell, J

Research Methods for Business Students FT Prentice Hall Social Research Methods Mixed Methods Research; Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches, Sage Management Research: An Introduction Thorpe, R & Lowe, A. Sage Research Methods for Managers Paul Chapman Publishing, 2002

Easterby-Smith, M,

Gill, J & Johnson, P

15

10. Module Evaluation During the second half of the delivery of this module, you will be asked to complete a module evaluation questionnaire to help us obtain your views on all aspects of the module. This is an extremely important process which helps us to continue to improve the delivery of the module in the future and to respond to issues that you bring to our attention. The module report in section 11 of this module guide includes a section which comments on the feedback we received from other students who have studied this module previously. Your questionnaire response is anonymous. Please help us to help you and other students at Anglia Ruskin by completing the Module Evaluation process. We very much value our students views and it is very important to us that you provide feedback to help us make improvements. In addition to the Module Evaluation process, you can send any comment on anything related to your experience at Anglia Ruskin to tellus@anglia.ac.uk at any time. 11. Report on Last Delivery of Module This module was delivered in the UK and at various oversees partnerships during the lat academic year. All module feedback reports showed positive comments. No centres reported any issues in terms of delivering the module.

16

Lord Ashcroft International Business School

Postgraduate Major Project

Department: All LAIBS Departments Module Codes: MOD001170 MOD001168 MOD001160

Academic Year: 2012/13 Semester/Trimester: 1 & 2

Contents
1. Key information 2. Introduction 3. The Dissertation process 4. Choosing a topic, issue, problem, or question 5. Using sources and referencing 6. The format and presentation of your dissertation 7. Criteria for assessing your dissertation 8. Characteristics of a postgraduate dissertation 9. Intended learning outcomes 10. How will my work be assessed? 10.1 Submitting a TurnitinUK Originality Report 10.2 Feedback 10.3 Reassessment 11. Assessment Offences 12. Feedback 13. Responsibilities of the student 14. Security 15. Learning resources
Appendix 1 Appendix 2 Appendix 3 Appendix 4 Appendix 5 Appendix 6 Appendix 7 Appendix 8 Appendix 9 2 Dissertation Timetable Dissertation Proposal Coversheet Producing and submitting your dissertation proposal How to structure your dissertation proposal Example of a Research Proposal Generic Assessment Criteria and Marking Standards LAIBS Postgraduate Dissertation Assessment Form LAIBS Supervisor Contact Log Ethical Approval

3 3-4 4 5

5-7 8-12

12

12-13

14 15 16 16-19 20 19-24 26 26 26 26-27

1. Key Information
Module/Unit title: Postgraduate Major Project Leader: Postgraduate Major Project

Dr. George Panagiotou London School of Marketing LS Education Group Email: drgeorgepanagiotou@googlemail.com

Every module has a Module Definition Form (MDF) which is the officially validated record of the module. You can access the MDF for this module in three ways via: the Virtual Learning Environment (VLE) the My.Anglia Module Catalogue at www.anglia.ac.uk/modulecatalogue Anglia Ruskins module search engine facility at www.anglia.ac.uk/modules

All modules delivered by Anglia Ruskin University at its main campuses in the UK and at Associate Colleges throughout the UK and overseas are governed by the Academic Regulations. You can view these at www.anglia.ac.uk/academicregs. A printed extract of the Academic Regulations, known as the Assessment Regulations, is available for every student from your Faculty Office (all new students will have received a copy as part of their welcome pack). In the unlikely event of any discrepancy between the Academic Regulations and any other publication, including this module guide, the Academic Regulations, as the definitive document, take precedence over all other publications and will be applied in all cases.

2. Introduction
In order to obtain a Masters degree you must prepare, submit, and pass a dissertation. Apart from this regulation requirement there are a number of reasons why the dissertation is a very important part of your studies. From the learning outcomes in the module definition forms (available on the VLE webpage) you will see that the dissertation is a demanding module. Perhaps a more attractive way of stating this is to say that it allows you an opportunity to demonstrate, at an advanced level, several important intellectual and practical skills. These skills are valued by employers and as the dissertation is your own work it is proof that you have mastered them. In fact, sometimes your dissertation will help you to obtain an interview or find the position you want. The dissertation is not a taught module and this means that the research and writing up of your findings is very much an individual effort that allows you to demonstrate both organisational and time management skills. You will have further honed your research skills and techniques and deepened your understanding of at least one major area of business and/or business related areas. Other high level skills which will be developed and improved include evaluation, synthesis, and critical thinking. Finally, a well-written dissertation enables you to demonstrate communication and presentation skills.
3

Full details of how to present your dissertation can be found in the Anglia Ruskin University publication, "Presentation and Submission of Projects and Dissertations for Taught Higher Degrees". A copy of this booklet can be obtained from the VLE. You are advised to make yourself aware of the entire contents of this booklet before you start your dissertation. You should read carefully the section on Formatting before you start any writing-up, as your dissertation will not be accepted if it doesn't comply with this section. Anglia Ruskin University regulations and guidelines do change from time to time. It is your responsibility to make sure that you are working to current regulations and guidelines so check that the Module Guide and Anglia Ruskin University publications you are using are up-to-date. If in doubt consult your supervisor and/or Postgraduate Dissertation Tutor.

3. The Dissertation Process

There are a number of formal processes associated with the dissertation. Registering your dissertation topic - This must be done by submitting a completed Dissertation Proposal Coversheet, along with your outline Dissertation Proposal (For an example see Appendix 5) to the IMSS by the published date. It is important that you submit your coversheet and proposal on time, to the relevant Faculty office, as you will not be allocated a supervisor until it is submitted. You may indicate a preferred supervisor on the form but we cannot guarantee you will be allocated the preferred supervisor as a holistic view of staffing is taken in the Business School. Please do not approach staff to ask if they can supervisor your dissertation, the course leader assigns supervisors. Allocating your supervisor - after you have completed and submitted your Dissertation Proposal Form you will be allocated a supervisor. This will be done by the Postgraduate Major Project Module Leader. One of the roles of the Postgraduate Major Project Module Leader is to utilise the staff resource in the Business School as effectively and efficiently as possible. The Postgraduate Major Project Module Leader will also endeavour to match your topic to staff expertise. Meeting your supervisor - you are strongly advised to meet your supervisor as soon as possible. The supervisor will be sent a copy of your proposal. Thereafter, you should meet regularly with your supervisor to discuss progress, resolve any problems you may have, etc. It is your responsibility to make and keep the appointments. If you have any problems in making appointments then please inform your Programme Leader immediately. Sometimes face-to-face meetings are not possible. In this case other means of communication, such as email, may be appropriate. Recording your meetings - you must keep a record of your meetings with your supervisor on the Contact Log Sheet (Appendix 8) and the completed CLS must be put with your dissertation when handing in. Submitting your dissertation - you must submit two comb-bound copies of your dissertation to the iCentre on or before the submission date. You will know this date by the time you commence stage three of your programme. If you think you have a good reason for a later submission you must ask for an extension (maximum 10 days). Only the Student Advisor can give you permission. Do not ask for an extension at the "last minute". A copy of the extension form must be submitted to the faculty office. Please make sure you are familiar with University policy on extensions. You must also submit 2 separate copies of the abstract along with two copies of the Assessment Form (Appendix 7) and an electronic copy of the dissertation on CD.
4

4. Choosing a Topic, Issue, Problem or Question

You choose your own topic but it has to be approved. You can choose a similar topic to which may have been assessed for another module as long as it does not cover identical ground. As a start, remind yourself that a dissertation is much more than just a simple descriptive account of some aspect of your course. Very often the success of your dissertation is determined by how successful you are in finding a good issue to pursue, a problem to investigate, a question to answer, and so on. Unless you are successful here you may be unable to develop a coherent and well argued dissertation. This first stage can be difficult so don't be afraid to spend some time on it. You may come up with a fairly broad topic but it will have to have a focus. Even at the broad topic stage you will have to ask yourself whether it is likely to be viable. You should also try to come up with a topic you are interested in personally, as a large amount of your time will be spent on background reading, fieldwork and/or other types of research, and finally writing up your research. If you are interested in your question, etc., then all this activity is likely to be a source of pleasure rather than an onerous and pointless burden. The activity associated with choosing the topic, problem, etc., should be done before you submit your Dissertation Proposal. Sometimes, even after much hard work, it may be difficult to come up with a focused topic, but please note that a broad general area may not be acceptable. You are advised to seek some specialist help before submitting your proposal if you run into difficulties. You are strongly advised to spend a good deal of time on choosing your topic. You will probably find it helpful to discuss possibilities with other students, and try out an initial literature search in areas you are considering. Even something quite simple such as writing out the nature of the problem or topic can be helpful at this stage. You are allowed to modify your topic, research question, etc., (and any necessary changes to your methodology) if you experience problems with your original intentions, your research throws up better and more interesting possibilities, and so on. Very occasionally, you may have to abandon your topic and change to something completely different but this is regarded as being exceptional.

5. Using Sources and Referencing

Do not forget that a dissertation depends crucially on source material. From the assessment criteria listed in a later section of this document you will see that you will be evaluated on the way you use your sources. Thus, before you finalise your topic and title, make sure that adequate and appropriate sources are available. This is particularly important if empirical research is a part of your dissertation. For instance, response rates to student questionnaires are often poor and/or slow. Your dissertation may depend mainly on primary sources such as surveys, interviews, statistics, etc. Many dissertations depend more on secondary sources such as books, articles, and the internet. As you can see from the assessment criteria below, supervisors will look for evidence that you have located a good selection of appropriate sources and understood them.
5

Make sure that you have acknowledged these sources. If you don't this will be viewed as passing off other peoples words and ideas as your own, ie. cheating, and you will be penalised for this dishonesty. Good references are an indication that you have found and used available sources and this will be taken into account when your dissertation is marked. As all quotations and paraphrases must be acknowledged this means that you will need to keep careful records of your research and reading. The use of references can cause difficulties. You must use the Harvard System of Referencing. The essence of this system is that whenever you quote from a primary or secondary source you add in brackets, immediately after the quotation, the surname of the author, the year of publication, and the page reference The referencing system outlined can be found at the following website: http://libweb.anglia.ac.uk/subjects/reference/harvard.php Example of Harvard referencing Carter persisted with the responsible import based recovery programme, hoping that the Germans and Japanese would ultimately follow their example. As a consequence of this policy the US trade deficit increased from $9.5 billion in 1976 to $31.1 billion in 1977 (Stein 1998, p159). (Stein 1998, p159) would appear after a direct quotation, or as in this case, the presentation of an idea. Direct quotes of more than 30 words or so should be indented on either side. Example: In my view, and notwithstanding some of the really important theoretical insights and results that the concept has generated, there are problems in trying to apply the concept of utility that have not had the attention they deserve. However, economists are now beginning to take more interest in the extent to which psychological evidence can inform the development of economic models. (Anand, 2006, p223) All books etc. you have cited in the text are listed in a reference list at the end of the dissertation in alphabetical order: author, initials, date, title, place of publication, publisher. Stein would thus appear as: Stein, J (1998) The Locomotive Loses Power: The Trade and Industrial Policies of Jimmy Carter; in Fink, G & Graham, HD (eds) The Carter Presidency: Policy Choices in the Post New-Deal Era, Lawrence, Kansas: University Press of Kansas. Note that this is a chapter in a publication edited by someone else. The full volume also needs to be cited thus: Fink, G & Graham, HD (1998) The Carter Presidency: Policy Choices in the Post New-Deal Era, Lawrence, Kansas: University Press of Kansas.

Note the use of italics in these two examples. It is always the title of the book that is italicised. All books etc. you have cited in the text are listed in a bibliography at the end of the dissertation in alphabetical order: author, initials, title, publisher, date. Mansfield would appear as: Mansfield, E.; Microeconomics: Theory & Applications, Norton and Company, 1995 If there is more than one book, journal article etc. by the same author your references will normally be distinguished by the year of publication. If the author has published more than one work in the same year, show them as 1992a, 1992b etc. Ensure that your document is spell-checked and pay particular attention to grammatical and punctuation errors.

Good scholarship, referencing and academic misconduct

In your project, as with all academic work you will be expected to demonstrate a high standard of academic referencing. To recap, this is for three reasons: 1 2 3 To show the breadth and depth of research you have carried out (e.g. get good marks!) To enable the reader to follow up on interesting ideas/research that you have discussed To avoid being accused o plagiarism.

As a level 3 student you should know all of the following information, but experience tells us that it is useful to include a re-cap. What is good scholarship? Academics (including you!) are engaged in the generation of new knowledge and insights that contribute to what we already know about the natural, supernatural and social world this is called scholarship. Good scholarship is the result of conventions that help the readers of academic research to see exactly what is new, what is the work of others and how it all fits together the main way this is done is through the referencing system. Put simply, authors (including you) need to make it clear what are not their own new ideas, by adding a citation after every idea or set of ideas they write about that are not their own. There are several different ways of doing this that have evolved from different academic disciplines (just as there are lots of different world languages). In the Business School we use the Harvard Referencing System. An excellent resource about referencing can also be found at the following website: http://www.learnhigher.org.uk/site/index.php We suggest that you select in depth mode from the drop-down menu on the bottom left of the page.

What do I reference?
As the above section suggests, you should attribute all your sources regardless of the medium the material comes in (e.g. You Tube video, journal article, blog, radio programme, book chapter etc.) There is a general rule of thumb that says that which is common knowledge does not need to be referenced, but of course, what counts as common knowledge? So-called common sense hides many assertions and prejudices that good

quality academic work should seek to expose. A useful technique to use if you want to include general assertions is to use constructions like: It is generally accepted that or, Arguably, or It is reasonable to assume But do take care, even assertions need some justification in the text to be credible. It is also a good idea to completely avoid cutting and pasting text from the internet, even if you correctly enclose a paragraph in quotation marks and add the reference underneath, you are unlikely to get many marks since this is not your own work and does not demonstrate your understanding. Quotations are good to see, but use them judiciously for the above reasons. If you can say it just as well yourself, write it in your own words and add the citation at the end of the sentence / passage. You need to include page numbers for all direct quotations. A useful reference, particularly with regard to referencing new electronic sources is at the following: http://libweb.anglia.ac.uk/subjects/reference/citation.php

6. The Format and Presentation of Your Dissertation

Your dissertation must be written in English in typescript form on A4 paper. Your name must not appear on the dissertation. TWO hard copies of your completed, bound dissertation and a CD to the i-centre by the published deadline (TBA). It is advisable to retain a copy for your own records. Please note submitted dissertations will only be returned in cases of failure. The maximum length of the dissertation depends on your chosen programme. Typically, the dissertation is 18,000 words (60 credits). However, some programmes allow 15,000 words (45 credits) or 12,000 words (30 credits). Please check with your Course Leader or Course Administrator. One of the approved regulatory changes in the word limits for Postgraduate Major Project modules which for all new learning from 1st July 2011 onwards will be: Postgraduate 30 credits: 12,000 words 45 credits: 15,000 words 60 credits: 18,000 words PLEASE NOTE: these revised word limits only apply to all new learning. Previous word limits as detailed in the third edition of the Academic Regulations apply to any student who commenced a Major Project module on or before 30th June 2011 (including any resit that may be required). Note The maximum number of words does not include footnotes, the abstract, the bibliography, indented quotations, appendices and tables. When you submit the copy of your dissertation you may be asked to submit, either on disk, using Word, or in manuscript, your working papers which have formed the basis of your
8

dissertation; for example, copies of articles, working notes and summaries, completed questionnaires and tapes or notes of interviews. These may provide the basis for a viva voce should that be necessary. These will be returned to you after the assessment process is complete. The cover sheet of the dissertation must include the following declaration: 'I declare that the above work is my own and that the material contained herein has not been substantially used in any other submission for an academic award'. The dissertation must be prefaced by an abstract. This is not an introduction but a summary which outlines the plan and argument of the dissertation. It should include brief details of the methodology employed. The abstract should not be longer than 300 words. It should be included immediately after the title page and it will be examined as part of the dissertation. A list of contents, such as the glossary, chapters, and appendices - with page references should be included at the front of the dissertation. Pages should be numbered and double-line spacing used. Your dissertation must be held together in a suitable spine binder with a disclaimer page which will be available from the Business Faculty Office, LAIBS 312, Cambridge or MAB301, Ashcroft, Chelmsford, or as designated by your centre. Diagrams, figures, tables, and illustrations should be incorporated into the text at the appropriate place, unless there is a series of them or they are continually referred to throughout the text. In this case they should be placed in appendices at the end of the work. You are advised to use a drawing package for diagrams and scan in other illustrations. The work of other authorities must be acknowledged. When quotations or general references are made they must be suitably referenced by using the Harvard system. Appendices should not contain material which is not used or referred to in the text. Similarly, illustrative material should not be included unless it is relevant, informative, and referred to in the text. A bibliography should be included at the end of the dissertation and should list, alphabetically, all the sources (including magazines and newspapers) that you have consulted. Books should be listed as: Author (surname then initials); title, edition, publisher, date. Other sources such as journals, magazines, and newspapers should be treated in a similar fashion. If sources are used which are not written in English then the English translation is required in the bibliography. You should also submit a copy of your dissertation on CD ROM this will be used to help verify the sources you have used. Your Dissertation should be presented as follows, ALL dissertations should include the following (but they may include more): Plastic Front Cover White Card Cover Disclaimer Page Abstract Set out on a page of its own immediately after the title page. The abstract is likely to be the last section to be written. It is a short (300 words maximum.) summary of the project (not an
9

(from Reprographics) (from Reprographics) (from your faculty office)

introduction) and should indicate the nature and scope of the work, outlining the research problem, key issues, findings and your conclusion/recommendations. Table of Contents An outline of the whole project in list form, setting out the order of the sections, with page numbers. It is conventional to number the preliminary pages (abstract, table of contents) with lower case Roman numerals (i.e. (i), (ii), (iii) etc.) and the main text pages (starting with the first chapter) in Arabic numerals (1, 2, 3, etc.) as shown below.

Contents
List of Tables List of Figures List of Abbreviations Acknowledgements Chapter 1 (Title) 1.1 (First Section heading) 1.2 (Second etc.) 1.3 (Third)

Page
i ii iii iv 1

List of tables and figures

You can present a list at the beginning of your dissertation/ project of the tables and figures you have included. A table is a presentation of data in tabular form; a figure is a diagrammatic representation of data or other material. Tables and figures should be clearly and consistently numbered, either above or below the table or figure. Each table and figure should have a separate heading (caption). The reader should be able to understand what the table or figure is about from this heading / caption without referring to the text for explanations. The numbers of the tables and the figures you use in the text and in the lists at the beginning should correspond exactly. Main body of document, appropriately structured (this structure may vary depending on the nature of your dissertation.) Bibliography / References Appendices (these should only contain material which is genuinely supportive of the argument in the main body of the dissertation). Supervisor Contact Log (completed) White Card Back Black Comb Binding (See Appendix 8) (from Reprographics) (from Reprographics)

Do remember that clear writing makes a good impression. If your grammar is poor, sentence construction clumsy, and spelling bad, then your communication with the reader will also be affected. You will not be penalised for poor English unless it is so bad that the meaning of what you have written cannot be understood. You are required to use the following format:

10

Use A4 size paper only. Type 1.5 or doublespaced. (You may want to use single spacing for indented quotes, footnote materials and the bibliography). Use one side of paper only. Margins should be approximately: o 3 cms on left hand side of page to allow for binding. o At least 1 cm on the right hand side o 3 cms top and bottom. Pages should be numbered in a single sequence from the contents page onwards. Short quotations can run in the text within single quotation marks (double quotation marks reserved for quotations within quotations). Quotations longer than about 30 words should be set in from the side of the page (normally the indent should be more than the paragraph indent). Always write in complete sentences. Do not resort to note form. Do not use abbreviations in the text unless they are for the organisations documents etc which are commonly initialised or referred to by acronyms eg. BBC All abbreviations must be explained when they first appear and included in the front of the document following the contents page and the list of tables and figures.

Your documents must be bound using a plastic or metal comb binding. The cover should be plain except for the title and the authors SID number. Reprographics will copy and bind your work. There is a charge for this service.

Forms of Dissertation
The final form your dissertation takes will depend on the topic and the approach you take for the presentation of the data. Two examples are: Example A Chapter 1 - Introduction An explanation as to what the Dissertation is all about and why it is important. The research questions or hypotheses. Chapter 2 - Literature Review A critical analysis of what other researchers have said and where your topic fits in. The theoretical framework. Chapter 3 - Methodology Why certain data was collected and how it was collected and analysed. Chapter 4 - Results A presentation of your research results. Chapter 5 - Analysis and Discussion Analysis of your results showing the contribution to knowledge you have made and acknowledgement of any weaknesses/limitations in your work. Chapter 6 - Conclusions/Recommendations A description of the main lessons to be learned from the study and what future research could be carried out. Chapter 7 - References and Bibliography References are a detailed list of sources from which information has been obtained and which has been cited in the text. The bibliography is a detailed list of other sources you have used but not cited. Appendices - Detailed data referred to but not shown elsewhere.

11

Example B You may wish to elect to write a descriptive type of dissertation that looks for patterns, ideas and hypotheses. If you do the quality of the dissertation will depend on: How thoroughly the issues are covered. How closely the facts relate to the original research question. Whether the data collected provides valuable and new information that is a contribution to knowledge. Whether the research could be built upon by future writers. The extent to which creativity has been used in building the narrative.

NB - This approach is not an extended essay, but evidence of critical reflection and analysis. The two forms of dissertation outlined above are given as an indication of possible formats. It is possible that your dissertation may require a different approach or modification to the above possibilities in presentation and content. Both presentation and content should be discussed with your Dissertation Supervisor at an early stage. Remember, study at Master's level encourages innovative application of research principles to academic work.

7. Criteria for Assessing Your Dissertation

The criteria for assessing your dissertation are shown OR the Postgraduate Dissertation Assessment Criteria Form that is included as Appendix 3 in this document. They are: Introduction Is the abstract adequate? Is there a clear purpose and rationale for the study? Clear set of objectives / research questions? Research Design & Methodology Was research design and methodology discussed? Was the approach appropriate? Use of Literature / Sources Was the range suitable and adequate? Has a critical review of the literature been adopted? Has the student made a link between existing literature and their own research? Results, analysis and interpretation of data Has the data been accurately presented and analysed or are the findings merely a description? Appropriate theory applied? Interpretation Has the student made reasoned judgements on their findings? Conclusion & recommendations Are conclusions reasoned? Do they correspond with the objective(s) of the dissertation? Has the student reflected on the extent they have achieved their objectives? Was limitations and future research discussed? Presentation - structure & language, Harvard Referencing correctly applied, appropriate use of tables/diagrams

8. Characteristics of a Postgraduate Dissertation

You will have gained some idea of what is required in a postgraduate dissertation from the learning outcomes of the module and from the assessment criteria above. In general terms we expect an emphasis on the critical literature review and an in-depth understanding of theory and methodology. Specifically,
12

Methodology - you will be expected to critically review the theoretical, empirical, and methodology literature. The theory should be comprehensively discussed and understood, and paradigms of inquiry and different methodologies should be explored. You should show awareness of the soundness of the methodology you use and its rationale. Problem formulation - you will need to be precise and rigorous about the problem formulation and the setting of objectives. Relevance and originality in the choice of topic is also important. Content and Analysis - your dissertation should clearly meet stated objectives and indicate the extent that arguments are based on valid and reliable evidence, and identified and worked within a critically analysed theoretical framework. Evaluation of Implications - the evaluation of the implications in the dissertation, based upon the analysis undertaken and upon any data collected, should be of high quality and aim for originality. Presentation - your dissertation should be well-structured in terms of both paragraphs and chapters. There should be attention to detail, expression should be clear, the title appropriate, and arguments coherent. Any appendices (and you are encouraged to keep these to a minimum) should be used. The same applies to references and the bibliography. Tables and diagrams should be of a high standard and make use of appropriate software.

13

9. Intended Learning Outcomes

Learning outcomes (threshold standards) No. Type On successful completion of this module the student will be expected to be able to: With reference to a chosen significant and complex area for enquiry establish a method for investigation / exploration of key concepts, models and principles. (University outcome) Critically evaluate complex issues from a variety of viewpoints Develop effective arguments to support relevant conclusions Critically justify and rigorously apply appropriate methodologies, techniques and practical strategies; being sensitive to the context. (University outcome) Where appropriate formulate solutions to business or management problems in discussion with peers, clients, mentors and others.

Knowledge and understanding

Knowledge and understanding Knowledge and understanding Intellectual, practical, affective and transferable skills Intellectual, practical, affective and transferable skills Intellectual, practical, affective and transferable skills

Reflect critically on the process and outcomes of the investigation/ enquiry.

Anglia Ruskin modules are taught on the basis of intended learning outcomes and that, on successful completion of the module, students will be expected to be able to demonstrate they have met those outcomes.

14

10. How will my work be assessed?

All dissertations or projects are marked first by your supervisor and then by a second marker. In addition, a sample of dissertations will be sent to an External Assessor. Dissertations are graded using the criteria set out on the dissertation assessment form (See Appendix 7). A Viva may be held if examiners feel unable to reach a final decision on a mark, based on the written work submitted. A Viva may also be held if a student is suspected of plagiarism. All coursework assignments and other forms of assessment must be submitted by the published deadline which is detailed above. It is your responsibility to know when work is due to be submitted ignorance of the deadline date will not be accepted as a reason for late or non-submission. All student work which contributes to the eventual outcome of the module (ie: if it determines whether you will pass or fail the module and counts towards the mark you achieve for the module) is submitted via the iCentre using the formal submission sheet. Academic staff CANNOT accept work directly from you. If you decide to submit your work to the iCentre by post, it must arrive by midday on the due date. If you elect to post your work, you do so at your own risk and you must ensure that sufficient time is provided for your work to arrive at the iCentre. Posting your work the day before a deadline, albeit by first class post, is extremely risky and not advised. Any late work (submitted in person or by post) will NOT be accepted and a mark of zero will be awarded for the assessment task in question. You are requested to keep a copy of your work.

10.1 Submitting a TurnitinUK Originality Report For the Postgraduate Major Project you are required to submit your TurnitinUK Digital Receipt with your work at the iCentre. Work submitted without the Turnitin Originality Report Receipt will have 10% of the overall mark deducted. The Originality Report will not be used to make assessment decisions unless concerns about poor academic practice, plagiarism or collusion arise out of the usual anonymous marking arrangements. The report may then be considered as part of the normal investigatory procedures undertaken by the academic team and the Director of Studies (please see Section 10 of the Assessment Regulations). 10.2 Feedback A completed Report Form for the dissertation will be sent to you. The dissertation remains the property of Anglia Ruskin University and will not be returned to you. You should therefore make an additional copy for your own use.

15

Anglia Ruskin is committed to providing you with feedback on all assessed work within 20 working days of the submission deadline or the date of an examination. This is extended to 30 days for feedback for a Major Project module (please note that working days excludes those days when Anglia Ruskin University is officially closed; eg: between Christmas and New Year). Personal tutors will offer to read feedback from several modules and help you to address any common themes that may be emerging. At the main Anglia Ruskin University campuses, each Faculty will publish details of the arrangement for the return of your assessed work (eg: a marked essay or case study etc.). Any work which is not collected by you from the Faculty within this timeframe is returned to the iCentres from where you can subsequently collect it. The iCentres retain student work for a specified period prior to its disposal. To assure ourselves that our marking processes are comparable with other universities in the UK, Anglia Ruskin provides samples of student assessed work to external examiners as a routine part of our marking processes. External examiners are experienced academic staff from other universities who scrutinise your work and provide Anglia Ruskin academic staff with feedback and advice. Many of Anglia Ruskins staff act as external examiners at other universities. On occasion, you will receive feedback and marks for pieces of work that you completed in the earlier stages of the module. We provide you with this feedback as part of the learning experience and to help you prepare for other assessment tasks that you have still to complete. It is important to note that, in these cases, the marks for these pieces of work are unconfirmed as the processes described above for the use of external examiners will not have been completed. This means that, potentially, marks can change, in either direction! Marks for modules and individual pieces of work become confirmed on the Dates for the Official Publication of Results which can be checked at www.anglia.ac.uk/results. After you have handed your work in or you have completed an examination, Anglia Ruskin undertakes a series of activities to assure that our marking processes are comparable with those employed at other universities in the UK and that your work has been marked fairly and honestly. These include: Anonymous marking your name is not attached to your work so, at the point of marking, the lecturer does not know whose work he/she is considering. When you undertake an assessment task where your identity is known (eg: a presentation or Major Project), it is marked by more than one lecturer (known as double marking) Internal moderation a sample of all work for each assessment task in each module is moderated by other Anglia Ruskin staff to check the marking standards and consistency of the marking External moderation a sample of student work for all modules is moderated by external examiners experienced academic staff from other universities (and sometimes practitioners who represent relevant professions) - who scrutinise your work and provide Anglia Ruskin academic staff with feedback, advice and assurance that the marking of your work is comparable to that in other UK universities. Many of Anglia Ruskins staff act as external examiners at other universities. Departmental Assessment Panel (DAP) performance by all students on all modules is discussed and approved at the appropriate DAPs which are attended by all relevant
16

Module Leaders and external examiners. Anglia Ruskin has over 25 DAPs to cover all the different subjects we teach. The following external examiners are appointed to this DAP and will oversee the assessment of this and other modules within the DAPs remit:

External Examiners Name Harold Birkett

Academic Institution University of Staffordshire (now Retired)

Position or Employer Lecturer

The above list is correct at the time of publication. However, external examiners are appointed at various points throughout the year. An up-to-date list of external examiners is available to internal browsers only at www.anglia.ac.uk/eeinfo.

17

Flowchart of Anglia Ruskins Marking Processes

Student submits work / sits examination
Work collated and passed to Dissertation Supervisors and second markers1

Marking Stage

Work is marked by Dissertation Supervisor and second marker. Marks are subsequently agreed2

Internal Moderation Stage

Internal moderation samples selected. Moderation undertaken by a third academic3

Any issues?

YES

NO Students receive initial (unconfirmed) feedback Unconfirmed marks and feedback to students within 20 working days (30 working days for Major Projects)

External Moderation Stage

External moderation samples selected and moderated by External Examiners4

Any issues? NO Marks submitted to DAP5 for consideration and approval

YES

DAP4 Stage

Confirmed marks issued to students via e-Vision

Marks Approved by DAP5 and forwarded to Awards Board

1 2

All work is marked anonymously or double marked where identity of the student is known (eg: in a presentation) The internal (and external) moderation process compares work from all locations where the module is delivered (eg: Cambridge, Chelmsford, Peterborough, Malaysia, India, Trinidad etc.) The sample for the internal moderation process comprises a minimum of eight pieces of work or 10% (whichever is the greater) for each marker and covers the full range of marks 18 Only modules at levels 5, 6 and 7 are subject to external moderation (unless required for separate reasons). The sample for the external moderation process comprises a minimum of eight pieces of work or 10% (whichever is the greater) for the entire module and covers the full range of marks DAP: Departmental Assessment Panel Anglia Ruskin has over 25 different DAPs to reflect our subject coverage

10.3

Reassessment

Whilst we hope that all our students are successful in all the assessment tasks they complete, on occasion some students fail their dissertation and are therefore given one opportunity to resit the assessment. In these circumstances, the e-Vision system will tell you if you have failed and what it is you have to do to retrieve that failure, e.g. a resit examination, write a new piece of coursework, etc. The e-Vision system will also tell you when this has to be completed. It is your responsibility to make sure you are aware of any resit requirements, the exact details of the reassessment and when it will take place, e.g. the submission deadline or the period for any examination. Please note that the overall mark for any module which you pass after you have been reassessed, e.g. undertaken a resit examination, will be capped at 40%.

11. Assessment Offences

You are reminded that any work that you submit must be your own. All suspected assessment offences will be investigated and can result in severe penalties. Please note that it is your responsibility to consult the relevant sections of the Academic Regulations (section 10 see www.anglia.ac.uk/academicregs) and the Student Handbook. When you are preparing your work for submission, it is important that you understand the various academic conventions that you are expected to follow in order to make sure that you do not leave yourself open to accusations of plagiarism (eg: the correct use of referencing, citations, footnotes etc.) and that your work maintains its academic integrity. Plagiarism is theft and constitutes the presentation of anothers work as your own in order to gain an unfair advantage. You will receive advice and guidance on how to avoid plagiarism and other elements of poor academic practice during the early stages of your studies at Anglia Ruskin. Guidance on being honest in your work Introduction Being honest in your work is at the heart of studying and working at university. To be honest in your work you must acknowledge the ideas and work of others you use, and you must not try to get an advantage over others by being dishonest. It is important that you understand what it means to be honest in your work. Although there is general agreement within the UK academic community about the types of activity that are unacceptable, this does vary slightly between institutions, and may be different from where you studied before. We have developed this guidance to help you understand what it means to be honest in your work, and what you should do to make sure that you are handing in work that meets our expectations. This means we can make sure that we can maintain reliable standards for our academic awards, and students continue to enjoy studying for academic qualifications that have a good reputation. In this guidance we will: clearly define what being honest in your work and good practice mean, and how you can achieve this; define assessment offences, including plagiarism, cheating and collusion;

19

identify the resources, help and advice available to help you learn the academic skills you need to avoid committing assessment offences; explain how we expect you to behave; and describe what happens if we think you have committed an assessment offence.

Being honest in your work and good practice You can show good practice when you do your work independently, honestly and in a proper academic style, using good referencing and acknowledging all of your sources. To show good academic practice you must:

show you understand the literature; use research from academics and others in your area of study; discuss and evaluate ideas and theories; develop your own independent evaluation of academic issues; and develop your own arguments. To support your own good practice you will need to develop your: skills at studying and getting information (for example, reading, taking notes, research and so on); skills in looking at an argument and making your own evaluation (for example, having a balanced opinion, using reasoning and argument); writing skills for essays, reports, dissertations and so on; referencing skills (how you include your sources of information in your work); and exam techniques (for example, revising and timing).

Achieving good practice is not as complicated as it may appear. You need to do the following.

Know the rules. Make sure you reference all of your information sources. Poor practice or dishonesty in your work (such as plagiarism, cheating, fraud and so on) can be a result of you not knowing what you are allowed to do. Develop your own style. Sometimes students include too much original text from the work of others, as they believe that they cannot put it any better. Although you should try to express ideas in your own words, quoting or summing up ideas from academic sources is fine, as long as you say where you have taken this from. You must also reference other peoples performances or art in your own work. It fine to use other peoples performances and art, but you must be completely clear about why you are using that work, and make sure it is obvious that it isnt your own.

Definitions of assessment offences Plagiarism Plagiarism is when you present someone elses work, words, images, ideas, opinions or discoveries, whether published or not, as your own. It is also when you take the artwork, images or computer-generated work of others, without properly acknowledging where this is from or you do this without their permission. You can commit plagiarism in examinations, but is most likely to happen in coursework, assignments, portfolios, essays, dissertations and so on.

20

Examples of plagiarism include: directly copying from written work, physical work, performances, recorded work or images, without saying where this is from; using information from the internet or electronic media (such as DVDs and CDs) which belongs to someone else, and presenting it as your own; rewording someone elses work, without referencing them; and handing in something for assessment which has been produced by another student or person.

It is important that you do not plagiarise intentionally or unintentionally because the work of others and their ideas are their own. There are benefits to producing original ideas in terms of awards, prizes, qualifications, reputation and so on. To use someone elses work, words, images, ideas or discoveries is a form of theft. Collusion Collusion is similar to plagiarism as it is an attempt to present anothers work as your own. In plagiarism the original owner of the work is not aware you are using it, in collusion two or more people may be involved in trying to produce one piece of work to benefit one individual, or plagiarising another persons work. Examples of collusion include: agreeing with others to cheat; getting someone else to produce part or all of your work; copying the work of another person (with their permission); submitting work from essay banks; paying someone to produce work for you; and allowing another student to copy your own work.

Many parts of university life need students to work together. Working as a team, as directed by your tutor, and producing group work is not collusion. Collusion only happens if you produce joint work to benefit of one or more person and try to deceive another (for example the assessor). Cheating Cheating is when someone aims to get unfair advantage over others. Examples of cheating include: taking unauthorised material into the examination room; inventing results (including experiments, research, interviews and observations); handing your own previously graded work back in; getting an examination paper before it is released; behaving in a way that means other students perform poorly; pretending to be another student; and trying to bribe members of staff or examiners.

21

Help to avoid assessment offences Most of our students are honest and want to avoid making assessment offences. We have a variety of resources, advice and guidance available to help make sure you can develop good academic skills. We will make sure that we make available consistent statements about what we expect in this document, and in student handbooks and module guides. You will be able to do tutorials on being honest in your work from the library and other central support services and faculties, and you will be able to test your written work for plagiarism using TurnitinUK (a software package that detects plagiarism). You can get advice on how to honestly use the work of others in your own work from the library website (www.libweb.anglia.ac.uk/referencing/referencing.htm) and your lecturer and personal tutor. You will have an opportunity to do a formative assignment before you finish and hand in your first summative assignment. A formative assignment is one in which you can talk about your work thoroughly with your tutor to make sure that you are working at the correct level for your award, and that you understand what is meant by good practice (a summative assignment counts towards the assessment for your course). You will be able to use TurnitinUK, a special software package which is used to detect plagiarism. TurnitinUK will produce a report which clearly shows if passages in your work have been taken from somewhere else. You may talk about this with your personal tutor to see where you may need to improve your academic practice. We will not see these formative TurnitinUK reports as assessment offences. If you are not sure whether the way you are working meets our requirements, you should talk to your personal tutor. They will be able to help you and tell you about other resources which will help you develop your academic skills. What we expect from you We will make sure you have the chance to practice your academic skills and avoid accidentally breaking our Academic Regulations. On page nine of the Student Charter (see http://web.anglia.ac.uk/anet/students/pdfs/09_student_charter.pdf), it says you have to be aware of the academic rules relating to your studies. To make sure that you are aware of the rules, we expect you to agree to: read this guidance and make sure you thoroughly understand it; work through PILOT, the online tutorial available on our library website (http://libweb.anglia.ac.uk/pilot/), which aims to help you learn good practice and has a useful section on plagiarism; make sure that you are familiar with how to reference (acknowledge other peoples work); correctly reference all the sources for the information you have included in your work; identify information you have downloaded from the internet; never use someone elses ideas for a performance, film or TV programme, their artwork, graphics (including graphs, spreadsheets and so on and information from the internet) as if they are yours; only hand in your own original work; never use another persons work as if it were your own; and never let other students use or copy your work.

22

What we will do for you To help you avoid making assessment offences, our staff will: make sure they are familiar with the guidance on being honest in your work and the Academic Regulations; tell you clearly about the guidance on being honest in your work and any guidelines on misconduct, and record the dates for future reference; arrange library information sessions for you; promote the resources on the library website and put links to them in module guides and student handbooks; include statements on academic honesty in each module guide, making sure they are consistent throughout our university; make you aware of the punishments for misconduct early in the course; give you effective guidance on how you should acknowledge the information you have used; tell you, in writing if possible, how far you may work with other students in your coursework; plan procedures for assessing work in a way that reduces plagiarism, cheating and collusion; be aware that you may have worked differently in the past and make sure that you are aware of good practice in the UK; familiarise themselves with TurnitinUK and its reports; and report all suspected misconduct using the proper disciplinary procedures.

Procedures for assessment offences An assessment offence is the general term used to define cases where a student has tried to get unfair academic advantage in an assessment for themselves or another student. We will aim to give you as much help as possible to avoid an assessment offence. We listed a number of possible assessment offences earlier in the document. These and any relevant breaks of the Academic Regulations are dishonest, unacceptable and not allowed. We will fully investigate all cases of suspected assessment offences. If we prove that you have committed an assessment offence, we will take action against you using our disciplinary procedures. For full details of what punishments you may receive for assessment offences, see the Academic Regulations, section 10 at: www.anglia.ac.uk/academicregs And finally One of the main aims of university is to give you the ability to learn, have independent judgment, academic rigour and intellectual honesty. You should encourage people to ask questions, to show personal and professional honesty, and have mutual respect. You, university teachers and support staff are responsible for working together to achieve this aim.

23

References Adapted from Scott, M, (2000), Academic Misconduct Policy. A model for the FE Sector. (Copyright _ Association of Colleges 2000) More information Academic Regulations, section 10 (www.anglia.ac.uk/academicregs) PILOT, the online tutorial in academic practice (www.libweb.anglia.ac.uk/pilot/ ) Referencing procedures (http://libweb.anglia.ac.uk/referencing/referencing.htm) RefWorks, a bibliographic management service that allows you to create a personal database and collect bibliographies in a variety of styles (www.libweb.anglia.ac.uk/referencing/refworks.htm) The Student Charter (http://web.anglia.ac.uk/anet/students/pdfs/09_student_charter.pdf)

24

12. Feedback
A completed Report Form for the dissertation will be sent to you. The dissertation remains the property of Anglia Ruskin University and will not be returned to you. You should therefore make an additional copy for your own use.

13. Responsibilities of the Student

It is your responsibility to prepare and present your dissertation by the deadline given. Failure to submit by that date will result in the dissertation being assessed as a FAIL. There will be NO EXTENSIONS allowed except in highly exceptional circumstances agreed by the Student Adviser. You should also be aware that you are responsible for: Submitting an initial synopsis (outline of your topic and title) by the specified date. Submitting a proposed timetable of work and research by the specified date. Building a substantial contingency into your timetable to allow for unforeseen and unexpected problems. Undertaking the necessary research. Ensuring that your Supervisor is kept informed of your progress. Ensuring that all progress reports, drafts etc are submitted to your Supervisor by the specified date. Arranging for the dissertation to be presented according to the guidelines given in this guide.

14. Security
As your work for the dissertation is of great importance, you should keep copies of all relevant material to guard against loss. It is advisable to have back-up copies of any disks on which you have stored information.

15. Learning Resources

Recommended Reading: Wilson, J. (2010), Essentials of business research: a guide to doing your research project, London: Sage Publications. Bell, J. (2010), Doing your research project: a guide for first-time researchers in education, health and social science, Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill. Burnett, J. (2009), Doing your social science dissertation, London: Sage Publications. Fisher, C.M. (2010), Researching and writing a dissertation: an essential guide for business students, Harlow: Prentice Hall. OLeary, Z. (2009), The essential guide to doing your research project, London: Sage Publications. White B (2000), Dissertation Skills for Business and Management Students, Cassell.
25

Recommended Internet Resources Your supervisor may be able to recommend internet resources of particular relevance to your area of research. Other Resources Use of a copyright library (letters will be provided by the Project supervisor to enable students to access a copyright library). Anglia Ruskin Digital Library: http://libweb.anglia.ac.uk/diglib.htm
Link to the University Library catalogue and Digital Library http://libweb.anglia.ac.uk/ Link to Harvard Referencing guide http://libweb.anglia.ac.uk/referencing/harvard.htm

Faculty Liaison Librarians ALSS Karen Ready (karen.ready@anglia.ac.uk) extn 2304 LAIBS Jolene Cushion (jolene.cushion@anglia.ac.uk) extn 2470 FoE Carol McMaster (carol.mcmaster@anglia.ac.uk) extn 4643 FHSC Maurice Wakeham (maurice.wakeham@anglia.ac.uk) extn 3766 FST Ruth Rule (ruth.rule@anglia.ac.uk) extn 2313

Specialist Learning Resources

None.

26

Appendix 1 Dissertation Timetable

Most students will begin their dissertation at the beginning of the second semester. The guidelines below commence at week one of the second semester of your postgraduate course.

Week 1

You should be deciding upon a subject area, title and initial study plan for your dissertation. You should have submitted a hardcopy of your completed Dissertation Proposal Coversheet and Dissertation Proposal form to the Faculty Office. NB without a proposal form we are unable to allocate a supervisor, it is therefore imperative that your proposal form is received on time.

By Week 5

By Friday Week 7

Details of allocated supervisors will be published for all students that have submitted a Dissertation Proposal form. The list will be made available on the VLE. Make contact with your supervisor in order to arrange an initial meeting to discuss your dissertation.

From Monday Week 8

By Dissertation Deadline Get your dissertation printed and bound (this must be in the correct format see section 8 of this guide) and submit two hard copies of your completed, bound dissertation and a CD to the i-centre by the published deadline (tba).

The dissertation deadline for submission will be notified to you by your centre.

27

Appendix 2 DISSERTATION PROPOSAL COVERSHEET

Student Name: Student Number:

Degree Programme: Dissertation to be submitted: May 2013

Please tick the most appropriate subject area for your Dissertation (one box only) Accounting and Finance Business Economics Organisational Behaviour HRM Other (please specify):

Business Decision Making Corporate Strategy Marketing Information Technology

Signature of Student:

Date:

Office Use Only

Proposed Dissertation Supervisor:

28

Appendix 3 Producing and submitting your dissertation proposal

You are required to produce a 750-800 word Dissertation Research Proposal. This should be based on your chosen dissertation topic. A guide to the structure of the proposal is set out in (Appendix 4), followed by an example of a Dissertation Research Proposal (Appendix 5). Although this example is slightly longer than what we are expecting from you, it still contains all of the key elements typically found in a research proposal. Its important to follow this structure as it makes it easier for us when it comes to allocating your Dissertation Supervisor. Once you have finished your completed proposal, it should be submitted to the Faculty Office along with your completed Dissertation Proposal Coversheet (Appendix 2). This is so that a Dissertation Supervisor can be allocated to you. The name of your Dissertation Supervisor will be posted on the VLE. This is likely to be done 7-10 days after you submit your proposal. Once you have found out the name of your supervisor, it is down to you to make contact in order to arrange an initial meeting to discuss your dissertation. Do not worry at this stage if you have not fully formulated your research topic. The important thing is that you have some idea of your proposed area of research. You can change your topic, although try to keep it within the same broad discipline e.g. Marketing, Economics, HR.
*Your proposal must contain a minimum of 5 references

29

Appendix 4 How to structure your dissertation proposal

Title
The title of your proposed research must fulfil a number of set criteria. First, it must reflect the nature of your study. For example, if you intend studying a particularly firms financial performance, then something to this effect must be stressed in your proposed title. Second, it must be concise. Ideally, try not to exceed more than 10-12 words. Third, try to avoid unnecessary terms such as Case study approach. Finally, try and keep your title clear and easy to understand. In other words, consider it from the laypersons point of view.

Research Problem
The research problem or the main focus of your research should be clearly set out within the introductory section of your proposal. As noted earlier, it is important that the nature of your topic is clear and easy to understand. Your introductory section should provide background to your study; while at the same time define any key words or terms. Ideally, brief reference should also be made to existing studies that are relevant to your own work. Of course, making sure that the Harvard referencing System is applied in the correct way.

Key Literature
This involves a shortened literature review that critically analyses the work by leading authors relevant to your own research issue. In short, it must be critical and not overly descriptive. The verbatim copying of previous studies also provides no evidence as to how existing work links to your own study. Remember that at some point you also need to say how your own research fits in to the gap of current literature. This usually comes somewhere towards the end of your preliminary review.

Methodology
This part of the proposal should classify your research design; include your rationale behind your chosen research strategy, along with methods for collecting and analyzing your data. This is of course dependent on your research approach. Aim to provide support for your choice of methodology. This can be done on the basis of using academic references or referring to previous work that also used a methodology similar to your own. Clear support for the latter option is the ability to compare your findings with that of previous studies. The importance of validity and reliability is something that one would also expect to see featured in this part of your proposal. In addition, use this as an opportunity to cite any potential limitations that you foresee with your research. Limitations are constraints in your research. For example, for most researchers financial and time constraints are potential limitations.

30

Research Timetable
Unlike your final research project, your proposal will not set out your research findings and conclusions. This part of the proposal is intended for you to develop your own research timetable. You might question the purpose of a timetable, as you prefer to work in an ad hoc manner. True, every researcher works in their own way. However, the setting out of clear tasks, along with start and completion dates can help you to work towards a set research schedule. A Gantt chart often works best. This can set out the tasks e.g. literature review, data collection; writing up etc, along with a respective start date and completion date. A point worth mentioning is that when allocating time, it is better to be conservative, rather than too ambitious.
SOURCE: Adapted from Wilson, J (2010), The Essentials of Business Research: A Guide to Doing Your Research Project, Sage Publications.

31

Appendix 5 Example of a research proposal

Title: The Internationalization and Brand Development of Chinese Firms Research Problem A number of internal and external factors have resulted in many Chinese firms becoming involved in the internationalization process. Increased domestic competition, along with an easing of regulations under WTO, has allowed Chinese firms to penetrate international markets. This has resulted in a dramatic increase in Chinese outward investment. However, there currently exists a limited amount of research on the internationalization of Chinese firms (Child and Rodrigues, 2005; Deng, 2007a; Deng, 2007b). The majority of research focuses on inward, as opposed to outward Foreign Direct Investment (FDI). Therefore, a gap needs to be filled that explores the reasons Chinese firms internationalize, as well as how they currently penetrate international markets. An important aspect of internationalization is how an organization develops its brand when penetrating international markets. For example, a key question is to what extent should we adapt our brand attributes? Often viewed as the workshop of the world, China has yet to develop a single brand that can be described as truly global. Building brands fits with the Chinese governments strategy of consolidating strategic industries in order to create national champions that can hold their own in global markets and is viewed as one more way for the country to restore its imperial glory (Shenkar, 2003: 158). Reasons for China developing global brands is that the home market is fiendishly competitive and puts constant pressure on prices, branded products can be more profitable than those of OEMs, and competing in foreign markets forces companies to innovate and improve, thus helping them to move away from their image as producers of cheap goods (Gao et al., 2003). According to one of the worlds leading brand consultants Interbrand, Chinese enterprises such as Haier, Lenovo, TCL and Huawei Technologies are ready to compete on a world stage. Although Chinese brands have made evident and impressive progress in terms of internationalization, they still have far to go to compete with their global rivals, and the gaps are even widening in some respects. This is demonstrated by the revenue of Chinas largest consumer appliance company, Haier, which in 2002 amounted to only about ten per cent of Sonys total electronic sales (Fan, 2006: 367). Interestingly, the current 2007 list of Interbrands top twenty-five Chinese brands includes a total of seven that feature China in their name. Much research has shown that country-oforigin (COO) affects consumers perceptions of brand image and consumer behaviour (Hong and Wyer, 1995; Peterson and Jolibert, 1995). Chinese products are typically perceived as being cheap, and of low quality. Therefore, one would postulate that in order to establish a global brand, reference to China might not help with global ambitions. Even Chinas East Asian neighbours have brands featured in the top 100. Japan has eight brands listed (positions in brackets), Toyota (6); Honda (19); Sony (25); Canon (36); Nintendo (44); Panasonic (78); Lexus (92) and Nissan (98), while The Republic of Korea has three brands listed Samsung (21); Hyundai (72) and LG (97). These Japanese and South Korean companies made the transition from national to global brands; however, this took some years to achieve. The development of Chinese brands has received limited attention from researchers (Fan, 2006). Therefore, a gap in the literature exists to explore reasons behind a lack of truly global Chinese brands, and determine the steps Chinese firms need to take in order to
32

achieve truly global brand status. In sum, the nature of this research project is to examine the internationalization and brand development of Chinese firms. As reflected in the title, a case study approach will be adopted. In other words, analysis will be based on the existing internationalization activities of Chinese firms. Research Objective / Questions

The main objective of the proposed research is - to better understand the internationalization and brand development of Chinese firms. The aim is to not only evaluate internationalization and the reasons China lacks a truly global brand, but also analyze what types of strategies Chinese brands need to take in order to achieve global brand status. The objectives for this study are as follows: Understand what motivates Chinese firms to internationalize. Examine the internationalization strategies adopted by Chinese firms. Determine the reasons behind Chinas lack of truly global brands. Examine the strategies Chinese firms need to adopt in order to develop global brands.

The main research questions to be addressed are: Why do Chinese firms decide to internationalize? What are the internationalization strategies adopted by Chinese firms? Why doesnt China currently have a major global brand? What strategies do Chinese brands need to adopt in order to achieve global brand status? How can Chinese firms compete in global markets?

Key Literature

There has been a call from a number of researchers to examine the internationalization of emerging market multinationals (EMM), especially those originating from China (See Fan, 2008: 357). Research into FDI in China is now a well trodden path. However, there exists a limited body of literature into Chinas outward investment. Particularly in relation to the internationalization process of Chinese firms. Child and Rodrigues (2005) article is one of the few studies that explore internationalization from a Chinese perspective. Obviously the growing dominance of China on the global stage is justification for a better understanding of the internationalisation of Chinese firms. Although there have recently been a number of high profile cases e.g. Lenovos acquisition of IBMs PC division, the actual process of internationalization of Chinese firms, and reasons behind it, have still not been fully explored. According to Hulland (1999) the source country of brands can be seen as an important determinant of brand choice. Given Chinas reputation as the workshop of the world it is difficult to find anything these days that is not produced in China. Although many of the worlds top global brands such as Nike, Nokia and Gap are produced in China and other developing countries, consumers often view these brands based on the origin of the brand, as opposed to the country of manufacture. Recently the made in China label has proven somewhat of a headache for marketers of Chinese brands. An article in Business Week (September 24th, 2007) highlights this by stressing that after a year of massive toy recalls
33

tainted toothpaste scares, and poisonous pet food incidents, consumers around the globe are thinking twiceor morebefore buying Chinese-made goods. Indeed, in a new survey of marketing and business professionals worldwide, 69% of respondents said the phrase Made in China hurts mainland brands. The word most frequently associated with Chinese products? Cheap.

Methodology
This study will use a range of secondary sources. For this study, this includes annual reports, promotional material, company documentation, published case descriptions, magazine and newspaper reports, as well as government printed sources. Multiple sources of data are used in case studies to increase validity and reliability (Yin, 1989). It should be stressed that the secondary data in this research is largely limited to data presented in English. As a non-Chinese speaker, this is an obvious limitation since it is restricting the volume of data available for analysis. However, it is a common problem for individual researchers conducting cross-cultural research. This study follows a qualitative approach by principally analysing relatively qualitative information and is based on comparisons between cases. Its intention is exploratory in nature, aimed at advancing tentative propositions rather than drawing generalized inferences (Child and Yan, 2003).

Research Timetable

It is envisaged that this entire research project will be completed within a period of 18 24 months. At first, this may seem like an extremely short period of time to complete such an indepth study, however, it must be noted that the student has already collected a significant amount of secondary data on the subject. In addition, the student has close contacts in a UK-Sino joint venture therefore has an excellent insight into the logistics of operating such a venture. In addition, he is very much familiar with existing relevant sources and has access to data.

34

RESEARCH TIMETABLE

Task Meet supervisor to discuss proposal Conduct literature review Formulate research questions Data collection Data analysis Writing up Submission

Start date May 2009

Completion date May 2009

May 2009

Continue up to 2 weeks prior to submission

June 2009

June 2009

June 2009 September 2009 January 2010 April 2010

September 2009 December 2009 March 2010

SOURCE: Wilson, J (2010), The Essentials of Business Research: A Guide to Doing Your Research Project, Sage Publications.

References
Child, J. and Rodrigues, S.B. (2005) The internationalization of Chinese firms: A case for theoretical extension, Management & Organisation Review, 1 (3): 381-410.

Child, J. and Yan, Y. (2003) National and transitional effects in international joint ventures: Indications from Sino-foreign joint ventures Management International Review, 41 (1): 5375.

Fan, Y. (2006) The globalisation of Chinese brands, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 24 (4): 365-379.

Fan, Y. (2008) The rise of emerging multinationals and the impact on marketing, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 26 (4): Viewpoint. Gao, P., Woetzel, J.R., and Wu, Y. (2003) Can Chinese brands make it abroad? The Mckinsey Quarterly, Special Edition: Global directions.

35

Hong, S. and Wyer, R.S. (1995) Effects of Country-of-origin and Product attribute information on product evaluation: An information processing perspective, Journal of Consumer Research, 16 (2): 175-187.

Hulland, J. (1999) The effect of country-of-brand and brand name on product evaluation and consideration: a cross-country comparison, Journal of International Consumer Marketing, 11 (1): 23-40.

Interbrand

(2007)

Made

in

China:

2007

Brand

Survey,

online

source:

www.ourfishbowl.com/images/surveys/Interbrand_Made_In_China_2007.pdf, accessed 10 July 2008.

Kwok, S., Uncles, M., Huang, Y. (2006) Brand Preferences and brand choices among urban Chinese consumers: An investigation of COO effects, Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing & Logistics, 18 (3).

Peterson, R.A. and Jolibert, A.J.P. (1995) A meta-analysis country-of-origin effects, Journal of International Business Studies, 26 (4): 883-901.

Ping, Deng (2007a) Investing for Strategic Resources and its rationale: The case of outward FDI from Chinese Companies, Business Horizons, 50 (1): 71-81.

Ping, Deng (2007b) Outward investment by Chinese MNCs: Motivations and Implications, Business Horizons, 47 (3): 8-16.

Shenkar, Oded (2006) The Chinese Century. New Jersey: Wharton School Publishing.

Yin, R.K. (1989) Case Study Research: Design and Methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

36

Appendix 6: ANGLIA RUSKIN UNIVERSITY GENERIC ASSESSMENT CRITERIA AND MARKING STANDARDS LEVEL 7 (was level 4)
Level 7 is characterised by an expectation of students expertise in their specialism. Students are semi-autonomous, demonstrating independence in the negotiation of assessment tasks (including the major project) and the ability to evaluate, challenge, modify and develop theory and practice. Students are expected to demonstrate an ability to isolate and focus on the significant features of problems and to offer synthetic and coherent solutions, with some students producing original or innovative work in their specialism that is worthy of publication or public performance or display.

Generic Learning Outcomes (GLOs) (Academic Regulations, Section 2) Mark Bands Outcome Knowledge & Understanding
Exceptional analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics with very clear originality and autonomy. Exceptional development of conceptual structures and argument making an exceptional use of scholarly conventions. Demonstrates independence of thought and a very high level of intellectual rigour and consistency. Work pushes the boundaries of the discipline and may be considered for external publication

Intellectual (thinking), Practical, Affective and Transferable Skills

Exceptional analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics. Exceptional development of conceptual structures and argument, making consistent use of scholarly conventions. Exceptional research skills, independence of thought, an extremely high level of intellectual rigour and consistency, exceptional expressive/professional skills, and substantial creativity and originality. Exceptional academic/intellectual skills. Work pushes the boundaries of the discipline and may be considered for external publication Outstanding analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics. Very high level development of conceptual structures and argument, making consistent use of scholarly conventions. Outstanding research skills, independence of thought, a high level of intellectual rigour and consistency, outstanding expressive/professional skills, and considerable creativity and originality. Exemplary academic/intellectual skills Excellent analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics. High level development of conceptual structures and argument, making consistent use of scholarly conventions. Excellent research skills, independence of thought, a high level of intellectual rigour and consistency, excellent expressive/ professional skills, and considerable creativity and originality. Excellent academic/intellectual skills, and considerable creativity and originality Good analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics. Development of conceptual structures and argument, making consistent use of scholarly conventions Satisfactory knowledge of key issues/ concepts/ethics in discipline. Descriptive in parts but some ability to synthesise scholarship and argument. Minor lapses in use of scholarly conventions

Characteristics of Student Achievement by Marking Band

90-100%

80-89%
Achieves module outcome(s) related to GLO at this level

Outstanding analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics with clear originality and autonomy. Outstanding development of conceptual structures and argument making an exemplary use of scholarly conventions. Demonstrates independence of thought and a very high level of intellectual rigour and consistency

70-79%

Excellent analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics. Excellent development of conceptual structures and argument making excellent use of scholarly conventions. Demonstrates independence of thought and a high level of intellectual rigour and consistency

60-69%

Good analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics. Development of conceptual structures and argument making consistent use of scholarly conventions Satisfactory knowledge of key issues/ concepts/ethics in discipline. Descriptive in parts but some ability to synthesise scholarship and argument. Minor lapses in use of scholarly conventions

50-59%

37

40-49%

A marginal pass in module outcome(s) related to GLO at this level A marginal fail in module outcome(s) related to GLO at this level. Possible compensation. Satisfies qualifying mark

Basic knowledge of key issues/concepts/ethics in discipline. Generally descriptive, with restricted synthesis of existing scholarship and little argument. Use of scholarly conventions inconsistent

Basic knowledge of key issues/concepts/ethics in discipline. Generally descriptive, with restricted synthesis of existing scholarship and little argument. Use of scholarly conventions inconsistent. Limited research skills impede use of learning resources and problem solving. Significant problems with structure/accuracy in expression. Team/Practical/ Professional skills not yet secure. Weak academic/ intellectual skills. Limited use of scholarly conventions

30-39%

Limited knowledge of key issues/concepts/ethics in discipline. Largely descriptive, with restricted synthesis of existing scholarship and limited argument. Limited use of scholarly conventions.

20-29%

Little evidence of knowledge of key issues/concepts/ethics in discipline. Largely descriptive, with little synthesis of existing scholarship and little evidence of argument. Little evidence of use of scholarly conventions.

Little evidence of research skills, use of learning resources and problem solving. Major problems with structure/ accuracy in expression. Team/Practical/Professional skills virtually absent. Very weak academic/intellectual skills. Little evidence of use of scholarly conventions Inadequate use of research skills, learning resources and problem solving. Major problems with structure/accuracy in expression. Team/Practical/Professional skills absent. Extremely weak academic/intellectual skills. Inadequate use of scholarly conventions No evidence of use of research skills, learning resources and problem solving. Incoherent structure/accuracy in expression. Team/Practical/Professional skills nonexistent. No evidence of academic/intellectual skills. No evidence of use of scholarly conventions

10-19%

Fails to achieve module outcome(s) related to this GLO. Qualifying mark not satisfied. No compensation available

Inadequate knowledge of key issues/concepts/ethics in discipline. Wholly descriptive, with inadequate synthesis of existing scholarship and inadequate argument. Inadequate use of scholarly conventions. No evidence of knowledge of key issues/concepts/ethics in discipline. Incoherent and completely but poorly descriptive, with no evidence of synthesis of existing scholarship and no argument whatsoever. No evidence of use of scholarly conventions.

1-9% 0%

Awarded for: (i) non-submission; (ii) dangerous practice and; (iii) in situations where the student fails to address the assignment brief (eg: answers the wrong question) and/or related learning outcomes

38

APPENDIX 7: ASHCROFT INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS SCHOOL, POSTGRADUATE DISSERTATION ASSESSMENT FORM Student Number: Dissertation Title:

First Marker: Second Marker: Marking Criteria Introduction Is the abstract adequate? Is there a clear purpose and rationale for the study? Clear set of objectives / research questions?

Suggested Mark: Suggested Mark: Comments

% % Agreed Mark: Mark % Weight 0.1 %

Weighte d Mark

Research Design & Methodology Was research design and methodology discussed? Was the approach appropriate?

0.2

Use of Literature / Sources Was the range suitable and adequate? Has a critical review of the literature been adopted? Has the student made a link between existing literature and their own research? Results, analysis and interpretation of data Has the data been accurately presented and analysed or are the findings merely a description? Appropriate theory applied? Interpretation Has the student made reasoned judgments on their findings? Conclusion & recommendations Are conclusions reasoned? Do they correspond with the objective(s) of the dissertation? Has the student reflected on the extent they have achieved their objectives? Limitations and future research discussed? Presentation - structure & language, Harvard Referencing correctly applied, appropriate use of tables/diagrams?

0.2

0.3

0.1

0.1

TOTAL:
Marks under each heading should be given careful consideration. If the default weight is inappropriate please indicate a new weight and explain this in your report overleaf (e.g. a work based project might involve less attention being paid to literature review).

39

OVERALL ASSESSMENT (please comment)

This part MUST be completed. Your comments should give justification for the marks overleaf. In particular, comments should pay attention to: How well the student has displayed an understanding of the research topic. How well the student was able to formulate a set of research questions. The students ability to present their findings and analyse their data. Literacy and professional presentation of the dissertation.

Markers Comments on Dissertation:

40

Appendix 8 LAIBS Supervisor Contact Log

SUPERVISOR CONTACT LOG (TO BE SUBMITTED WITH DISSERTATION) Student Number:

Degree Programme:

Proposed Dissertation Title (as submitted to Faculty Office):

Agreed Title (as agreed with supervisor):

Supervisors Signature:

Date:

Date and time of meeting

Notes

Supervisors initials

This form is to be submitted for signature by your supervisor on every occasion that you consult him or her regarding your dissertation. The completed log must be submitted with your dissertation.

41

Appendix 9 Lord Ashcroft International Business School Application for Ethics Approval (Undergraduate, Taught Masters Dissertations, Researchbased Management Research Reports, and Work-based Projects)

42

Introduction This document applies to all students registered as a student at Anglia Ruskin University in the Lord Ashcroft International Business School (AIBS), and all their Partner Institutions, regarding the ethical approval of Undergraduate, Taught Postgraduate Masters Dissertations, Researchbased Management Research Reports, and Work-based projects. For those undertaking any research/project work outside the UK you are required to ensure that your research/study/project complies with UK legal and ethical requirements. Ethics Policy (This policy is under review) Ethics approval must be obtained before any fieldwork, data collection, and/or data analysis commences. The ethics approval process can be viewed at the following link: http://web.anglia.ac.uk/anet/rdcs/ethics/forms.phtml . To make an ethics application, please complete the required set of forms and submit to your Faculty Research Ethics Panel Administrator (FREP): Sandra di Eleonora( Administrator): sandra.di-eleonora@anglia.ac.uk

Failure to obtain ethical clearance may mean that you are not insured by the University, or you are putting yourself, and those taking part in your research at risk. Failure to obtain ethical clearance, may result in your dissertation/management report being rejected outright, not marked, and treated as null and void. This could result in a first fail, and this may delay your graduation, and the award of your degree and/or professional qualification. If your study/project involves the NHS you must/are required to obtain ethical clearance from the NHS via their ethical committee structure, and until you have received such clearance you cannot proceed with your study/project (this includes all types of project, there are no exceptions). It will, of course, delay the completion of your course, and your graduation. Alternatively, the ethics panel may require further information, or insist that some safeguards, and/or protocols are put in place before you are allowed to proceed with your research. Please note: Ethics approval cannot be given retrospectively. This means that if you complete a Dissertation or Research-Based Management Report, you cannot submit signed ethics forms once you have entered the field, data collection, and/or data analysis process, or upon submission of your work.

43

Adapted from Section 3 of the British Psychological Society Guidelines for minimum standards of ethical approval in research (July 2004)
St Andrews House

General Principles
3.1 Ethical approval for all research. Ethical approval is required for all research carried out by staff and students. This includes research where there is no face-to-face interaction between researcher and participants (for example, postal questionnaires, telephone interviews, and internet surveys). Ethical approval is also required for student practical/laboratory exercises (on a generic basis) and there may be situations in which ethical approval is required for teaching demonstrations involving human participants or nonhuman animals. 3.2 Protection of participants. All researchers are obliged to protect their participants from possible harm, to preserve their dignity and rights, and to safeguard their anonymity and confidentiality, as far as possible. All research should be conducted under competent supervision, and supervisors are also obliged to protect their supervisees from possible harm, being mindful of any health, safety and insurance issues that may apply to a given programme of research. 3.3 Informed consent. Article 17 of the Protocol to the Convention on Human Rights in Biomedicine or Biomedical Research states: No research on a person may be carried out without the informed, free, express, specific and documented consent of the person. This places a legal obligation on researchers to obtain and record consent from participants or their guardians, on the basis of information that should be given to them before their participation begins (see Note 1). 3.4 No coercion. There should be no coercion in the recruitment of participants. It is recognised that when training psychologists in research, there may be an ethical obligation on them to also participate in research. Under these circumstances, participants should be given alternatives so that there is no coercion to participate in any particular study (see Note 2). 3.5 The right to withdraw. There is an obligation on participants to participate in research for which they have volunteered. Nevertheless, participants must be given the right to withdraw from any given research, at any time without penalty and without providing reason. Participants can also require that their data be withdrawn from the study.

3.6 Anonymity and confidentiality. Participants must be assured that all information they give will be treated with the utmost confidentiality, and will not be disclosed to anyone else with prior consent of, and that their anonymity will be respected at all times unless otherwise determined by law (for example, in the case of records maintained by the Prison Service). Where relevant, participants should be told about where information about them will be stored, who will have access to it, and what use will be made of it. Procedures for data storage must conform to the Data Protection Act. Express
44

permission must be obtained for any non-confidential use of participant information. Express permission must also be obtained for access to specified information from confidential records, e.g. medical notes, or educational attainment records. Where relevant, any limitations to confidentiality (for example obligations under law, or where there may be a threat to self or others) must be explained. 3.7 Appropriate exclusion criteria. Recruitment of participants for a given study should apply exclusion criteria that protect the health and well being of participants (for example, exclusion on the grounds of psychological vulnerability or a pre-existing medical condition). 3.8 Monitoring. Researchers are obliged to monitor ongoing research for adverse effects on participants and to stop the research if there is cause for concern about their health and well-being. 3.9 Duty of care. There is a duty of care on researchers to ameliorate any adverse effects of their research on participants (either personally or by referral to an appropriately qualified person). As a general rule, researchers should debrief participants at the end of the research either verbally or in writing. 3.10 Additional safeguards for research with vulnerable populations. Special safeguards need to be in place for research with vulnerable populations. Vulnerable populations include schoolchildren under the age of 18, people with learning or communication difficulties, patients in hospital or people under the care of social services, people in custody or on probation, and people engaged in illegal activities, such as drug abuse. For example, research with vulnerable populations may require Criminal Records Bureau clearance; research with schoolchildren under the age of 18 also requires that parents or guardians be informed about the nature of the study and the option to withdraw their child from the study if they so wish (see Notes 1 and 3). 3.11 Ethical treatment of non-human animals. Researchers are obliged to follow ethical guidelines for research with non-human animals. Guidelines are appended to the Societys Code of Conduct and are available on the Society website (see Note 4). 3.12 Appropriate supervision. Student investigators must be under the supervision of a member of Academic Staff. It is the supervisors responsibility to ensure that the student is aware of relevant Guidelines and of the need to observe them. Note 1: How to obtain informed consent In order that consent be informed, consent forms may need to be accompanied by an information sheet for participants setting out information about the proposed study (in lay terms) along with details about the investigators and how they can be contacted. If applicable, this sheet may also make reference to any screening procedures, the confidentiality of the data, any risks involved, and any other points which participants might reasonably expect to know in order to make an informed decision about whether they wish to participate, and which are not included on the informed consent form. A checklist of points on an informed consent form that participants are expected to sign, might typically include:
45

a) b) c) d)

That their participation is voluntary, That they are aware of what their participation involves, That they are aware of any potential risks (if there are any), That all their questions concerning the study have been satisfactorily answered.

Documented consent may be signed or initialled (if participants wish to maintain anonymity). In situations where information about the research and participant consent is conveyed verbally, it is recommended that the information be recorded on and read from or cued by a written information sheet; verbal consent should also be taped in order to provide a record. Added safeguards may be required to obtain informed consent with vulnerable populations. For example, research with children in schools cannot take place without the permission of the head teacher and teacher responsible for the children, or those covered by the Mnatal Capacity Act. Where they are competent to give it, informed consent should also be obtained from the children themselves. In addition, parents or guardians should be given all relevant details of the study (in a letter) along with an opportunity to withdraw their child from the study if they so wish (passive consent). If the school requires it, parents may also be required to return signed consent forms (active consent). 1. Will you describe the main procedures to participants in advance, so that they are informed about what to expect? 2. Will you tell participants that their participation is voluntary? 3. Will you obtain written consent for participation? 4. If the research is observational, will you ask participants for their consent to being observed? 5. Will you tell participants that they may withdraw from the research at any time and for any reason? 6. With questionnaires, will you give participants the option of omitting questions they do not want to answer? 7. Will you tell participants that their data will be treated with full confidentiality and that, if published, it will not be identifiable as theirs? 8. Will you debrief participants at the end of their participation (i.e. give them a brief explanation of the study)? If you have ticked No to any of Q1-8, please give an explanation on a separate sheet. 9. Will your project involve deliberately misleading participants in any way?
46

10. Is there any realistic risk of any participants experiencing either physical or psychological distress or discomfort? If Yes, give details on a separate sheet and state what you will tell them to do if they should experience any problems (e.g. who they can contact for help). If you have ticked Yes to 9 or 10 you please give a full explanation on a separate sheet. 11. Does your project involve work with: Animals Schoolchildren (under 18 years of age) People with learning or communication difficulties Patients People in custody People engaged in illegal activities (e.g. drug taking)

Note that you may also need to obtain satisfactory CRB clearance (or equivalent for overseas students) for your study. There is an obligation on the lead researcher (you) to bring to the attention of your supervisor and/or the ethics panel any issues with ethical implications not clearly covered by the above checklist.

47

NHS Defining Research: NHS guidance to help you decide if your project requires review by a Research Ethics Committee

48

49

50

51

52