Poor CUEGIS Answer 10

Criterion Marks awarded Marks available Comments

A 2 4 The understanding of the concepts is at best satisfactory. They are not

explicitly defined.

B 2 4 There is an attempt to link business management content to the

concepts but this is not developed. Answer jumps between Banamex
and Citigroup.

C 2 4 Analysis is descriptive and most of the assertions made are not justified.
Given the above comment, two companies are seemingly considered.

D 2 4 Three elements are present but the answer veers away from Banamex,
hence not all paragraphs are fit for purpose and/or clearly organized.

E 2 4 Staff/management are considered appropriately but customers are not,

hence on a best fit approach 2 out of 4 is an appropriate mark given the
markscheme.

Overall 10 20 A fairly descriptive response, which does not really cover either business
well. Conceptual knowledge of globalization and change and their
interrelated aspects is weak.

Good CUEGIS Answer (16)

Criterion Marks awarded Marks available Comments

A 3 4 Good understanding of both concepts, especially change.

B 3 4 The content weaving through th e concepts includes culture, research

and human resources. Mostly identified through examples.

C 3 4 There is a good indication that the statements are justified. There is

evidence of balance in the analysis with a number of disadvantages.

D 4 4 Very well laid out with an introduction, fit-for purpose paragraphs and a
conclusion. Ideas are clearly well organized.

E 3 4 Different stakeholders are considered appropriately but not an individual.

Phil Knight’s role in the process of change is not articulated.

Overall 16 20 A well-written response, which is clear and applies concept to context

and content. There is a little too much on culture, which indicates that
the candidate could have adapted this material to question 7 if they had
selected this.
 Paper 1 Qst C 2o Markers

Bad

Criterion Marks awarded Marks available Comments

A 1 4 There is some understanding of “negotiation” but the analysis lacks

depth and clarity. Application and development are limited in depth and
scope. There is some understanding of “negotiation” but the analysis
lacks depth and clarity. Application and development are limited in depth
and scope.

B 1 4 Some limited context/application. The tools largely impact the

candidate’s ability to make reasoned arguments.

C 2 4 Some possible arguments explored but they lack depth and development.
Arguments lack judgements.

D 3 4 Four elements present but lacking in organization for 4 marks.

E 1 4 Only groups (employees and pressure groups) considered and without

much development. Analysis is superficial.

Total 8 20

Good

Criterion Marks awarded Marks available Comments

A 4 4 Good knowledge and understanding of relevant tools, techniques and

theories is demonstrated.

B 3 4 All tools and techniques are well developed with relevance to the
additional stimulus, which could have been more convincing for full
marks.

C 3 4 Relevant arguments made well and justified/substantiated related to

issues raised in the additional stimulus material. These, however, could
have been more convincing.

D 3 4 Four elements present but lacking in organization for 4 marks. The

conclusion lacked depth.

E 3 4 There is a thorough analysis of groups which, in this case, makes up for

the lack of individuals.

Total 16 20